Turning Left in a left turn lane

"Being in a lane that requires a particular maneuver is quite different to being in a lane that allows a particular maneuver. The question is, does being in a lane that requires a particular maneuver constitute signalling your intention? I would contend it does because you have no option to do otherwise"

Your contention is incorrect.

"The excerpt of the legislation you quote in post #16 refers to a vehicle signalling an intention to turn left but does not specify how it should signal. Obviously using an indicator lamp is the norm but a driver could use hand signals (I think that's still legal) so why not road position, whereby the driver has no option but to follow the road signage?"

The law does indeed specify how the indication must be given, by "using a direction indicator........or give the appropriate hand signal". Anyhting else, such as the mere presence in the lane does not satisfy the legal requirement to indicate your intention.

Yes, it is a penalty point offence to fail to obey the lane indications.

Your intention to turn is given via your direction indicator (or hand singlas), not the lane you are in, the law does not provide for lanes to give intentions of changing directions.

Never heard instructors tecahing that way, but if they are doing so the advice is being given which is contrary to what the law says.

The law specifically requires you to indicate when turning left or right or when otherwise altering course, there is no save when a directional arrow is provided stipulation.

Spot on, some of the comments on this thread are scary but show why so many accidents occur in this country, wondering if you should indicate or not when taking a left turn in a left turn only lane! Of course you bloody indicate

If you think that the Gardaí use the ROTR against you in court you are totally mistaken and have absolutely no idea of how the law works, and yes under the rules of evidence anything other than an actual Act, Regulation or common law provision is considered hear say in a court of law, and that includes the ROTR.

I always refer to that as blinkered driving, absolutely no idea as to what's occurring around them.

I used to cycle that route before the wands.

Was a bad junction back then for cyclists. Seems like they just made it more dangerous.

Left turn-only lanes generally only have an arrow on the actual road surface and not an actual road sign. This was the case in the linked video. So when there is a line of traffic this won't be very visible as in this example, to the cyclist on the left. Indicators are there to show other road users the driver's intention, not to replace road signs. Note that it also applies for pedestrians,m who equally cannot see if it is left turn only but the driver isn't giving any indication of their intention.

What I'm still not getting... From anyone.. Is. Why would you not indicate??

As for driving instructors teaching people they should not indicate...wtf???

WHY would you not?

I cant understand why you would indicate when it's the only way you can go. You dont indicate when you go around a bend on a normal road.

What difference does direction make. There are lots of places where left lanes only go one way but continue forward . The angle to the turn is irrelevant.

It's not the only way you can go when you're in a left-hand-turn only or right-hand-turn only lane; it's the only way you should go. But it's handy for the rest of us to know that that is, in fact, the way you are going to go.

(Also, you can't assume that other road users know that the land is l/h only, or whatever, and there's only one way you should go; you saw the road marking before you drove your car onto it, but by the time I got there it may have been obscured by your car, or by someone else's.)

Below is the junction in question, there are 2 lanes before and two lanes after, the assumption would be both lanes have the option of going straight. I'm not a fan of assumptions but given the only signage is arrows on the road which could be easily covered people will have to make assumptions. If a car isn't indicating left the logical conclusion in the absence of any other evidence (remember road arrows aren't visible and there is a lane on other side of junction for car to go into) is that the car would go straight.

That is why you would indicate.

If the junction were like this I could understand the logic of not needing to indicate, I still think it is good practice, in this case there is no other realistic option.

A lot of drivers just don't indicate full stop.

yep, check behind, signal, approach turn, check nearside mirror, proceed if clear - all muscle memory/natural to do.

No surprise left hooks happen like this when the first step or two aren't done. Its very telling what kind of self centred mindset some have when they can't even imagine why they might want to signal. Makes you wonder what else is missing from their skill set.

"There is no mention of "use your indicator" or signal etc in the law. It specifies only a general indication"

Incorrect, the law specifically says you must use "a direction indicator........or give the appropriate hand signal".