An eagle-eyed retired Shipley driving test examiner has found mistakes in the Highway Code - yet again.
Paul Stephenson, 69, spotted the mistakes in the latest version of the Code and has written to the Transport Department to point them out.
Mr Stephenson claims there are five mistakes, but the department has admitted to two.
But despite him asking for them to be corrected, the department says it will not be withdrawing the books which came out in January.
It is the second time Mr Stephenson, of Cliffe Gardens, has spotted mistakes. In 1993 he found an error and one million copies of the Code were altered.
Mr Stephenson worked for the then Department of Transport at Horsforth for thirty years, rising to a supervising examiner before he retired.
His latest find is particularly embarrassing for the department as the printing of the new Highway Code had already been delayed for one month after an error was spotted in the final draft.
Mr Stephenson said: "It is absolutely staggering that the revised code was released to the public, after being held back for correction, with these errors and omissions which will be read by learner drivers, the motoring public, and the public in general. I'm sure corrections will be made eventually but it's a case of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted."
According to Mr Stephenson, in a section about the use of fog lights when visibility is seriously reduced, Paragraph 201 of the latest code said: "You may also use front or rear fog lights (In addition to headlights)" whereas the law states it should be "instead" of headlights.
And in Paragraph 162 the advice given when taking a left turn when you are over half way round a roundabout was incorrect as it instructed the driver to remain in the left hand lane throughout. Mr Stephenson said the driver should indicate as if turning right once at the roundabout, move straight into the right hand lane and only indicate left when coming to the chosen left-hand turning.
A Transport Department spokes-man said: "These are minor problems and we will change them in the next edition but we are not going to recall the whole run.
"We are grateful to the chap for pointing them out to us. The officials have said some of them do need correcting in the next edition and some of the others points Mr Stephenson raised are more subjective."
He did not know how the errors would affect learners taking driving examination tests but a new edition was normally printed within a year.
Where they went wrong
According to Mr Stephenson in a section about the use of fog lights when visibility is seriously reduced paragraph 201 of the latest code says: "You may also use front or rear fog lights (In addition to headlights)" whereas the law states it should be "instead" of headlights.
l Then in paragraph 162 the advice given when approaching a roundabout to take a left turn when you are over half-way round is incorrect as it instructs the driver to remain in the left hand lane throughout.
Mr Stephenson said the driver should indicate as if turning right as he/she approaches the roundabout, move straight into the right hand lane and only indicate left when coming to the chosen turning.
The DoT admits both these points, but denies his other arguments
l In paragraph 99 on the subject of skids, Mr Stephenson argues there should be separate advice for coping with a skid on a rear-wheel drive and a front-wheel drive vehicle. The advice given only covers rear-wheel drive vehicles.
l On to paragraph 167 and pedestrian crossings. Mr Stephenson says it should read "You must not overtake the moving motor vehicle nearest the crossing". The code has omitted the word motor which is written in the law.
l Finally, in paragraph 93 on lighting requirements, Mr Stephenson argues the definition of "restricted road (those with street lights not more than 185 metres apart)" is vague. He said in the old code's paragraph 131 it is referred to as "Rear lighted street lights" which is correct and better. He argues a better definition of night is given in the old code.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article