Motorists, what to do about cyclists who constantly break the high way code???

1…34689…37

Comments

  • Strider590
    Strider590 Posts: 11,874 Forumite
    edited 14 October 2016 at 2:58PM
    Tilt wrote: »
    Excellent post.

    But can I ask if, in addition to the light on your helmet, you have a front light on your bike as well? I ask because just recently I have encountered a group of cyclists out in the sticks at night with only lights on their helmets at the front. Until I got nearer, i didn't recognise them as cyclists (thought there were on horses initially) and wondered in fact whether it is legal not to have a fixed front light on the bike itself?

    You encountered mountain bikers.
    They won't tend to use lights on the bike actual as their handlebars are constantly being pulled left/right, an attached light would be disorientating and be highly likely to get thrown off. They probably had all their reflectors removed too, as most likely they transported the bike in a car or van to that location.

    Reflectors shipped with high end mountain bikes are just token gestures, they snap off ridiculously easily, I remember an old friend on his new MTB, he was riding down a rocky decent, the front reflector bent downwards, jammed into his tyre and sent him flying over the bars into a tree.
    The pedal reflectors (required on roads) end up getting smashed on rocks, SPD pedals come with pathetic reflectors that tend to get caught in the shoe cleats.
    Wheel reflectors unbalance the wheels and make for a pretty rough ride at 30+ mph.

    Plus, who's going to be driving a car through the local woodland?

    Me personally, I took my reflectors off my MTB and replaced them with retroreflective tape (red at the back, white at the front and yellow on the side), just in case I ever get caught out and need to ride down a road as it's starting to get dark.




    Has this thread devolved into having a pop at all types of bicycle riders? Are we going have a go at BMX cyclists next? doing all their irresponsible jumping and stuff, often without any brakes fitted!!!!
    “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”

    <><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/
  • Johno100
    Johno100 Posts: 5,259 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Has this thread devolved into having a pop at all types of bicycle riders? Are we going have a go at BMX cyclists next? doing all their irresponsible jumping and stuff, often without any brakes fitted!!!!

    If they are doing so on the road or my local pedestrianised shopping area, then yes. Have you got a problem with that?
  • NBLondon
    NBLondon Posts: 5,527 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Are we going have a go at BMX cyclists next? doing all their irresponsible jumping and stuff, often without any brakes fitted!!!!
    Well since you ask... If it's on a marked trail where you are only encountering other bikers - knock yourself out - or rather don't because you're probably wearing a helmet. If it's on a footpath marked "No Cycling" then get off and walk; if it's a towpath or a byway or a permissive path - be prepared to give way to walkers. I speak as someone who has been known to hike along the coast and again, the majority of cyclists will pause, or hop onto the grass at the side if practical. There's the same arrogant minority who will charge ahead at full speed and expect everyone else to leap aside or squeeze into a nettle patch for them.
    Wash your Knobs and Knockers... Keep the Postie safe!
  • Tilt
    Tilt Posts: 3,599 Forumite
    Norman_Castle wrote: »
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3834940/Rider-s-risky-overtake-causes-calamitous-crash-sending-cyclists-sprawling-floor-congested-superhighway-track.html

    If thats supposed to be used in both directions shouldn't it have a centre line?

    Good question and perhaps one for Boris. I have to say it looks a tad narrow for it to be two way, especially given the fact that it's going to be used by a lot of cyclists. If you look closely you will note that the painted 'cycle' symbols on the surface appear to face both directions which means it is meant to be two way. But it looks scary to me given the speed some of the cyclists are going!
    PLEASE NOTE
    My advice should be used as guidance only. You should always obtain face to face professional advice before taking any action.
  • Tilt
    Tilt Posts: 3,599 Forumite
    Strider590 wrote: »
    You encountered mountain bikers. They won't tend to use lights on the bike actual as their handlebars are constantly being pulled left/right, an attached light would be disorientating and be highly likely to get thrown off. They probably had all their reflectors removed too, as most likely they transported the bike in a car or van to that location.

    Did I? They looked like road bikers when I passed them. But my question was is it legal just to have a light on the helmet as from a distance, they didn't look like cyclists.
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Reflectors shipped with high end mountain bikes are just token gestures, they snap off ridiculously easily, I remember an old friend on his new MTB, he was riding down a rocky decent, the front reflector bent downwards, jammed into his tyre and sent him flying over the bars into a tree.
    The pedal reflectors (required on roads) end up getting smashed on rocks, SPD pedals come with pathetic reflectors that tend to get caught in the shoe cleats.
    Wheel reflectors unbalance the wheels and make for a pretty rough ride at 30+ mph.

    Plus, who's going to be driving a car through the local woodland?

    The ones I encountered were riding on a narrow country road and they were riding in a bunch and not single file.
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Has this thread devolved into having a pop at all types of bicycle riders? Are we going have a go at BMX cyclists next? doing all their irresponsible jumping and stuff, often without any brakes fitted!!!!

    Not as far as i'm concerned, just the irresponsible ones. ;)
    PLEASE NOTE
    My advice should be used as guidance only. You should always obtain face to face professional advice before taking any action.
  • Pixie5740
    Pixie5740 Posts: 14,515 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Tilt wrote: »
    Did I? They looked like road bikers when I passed them. But my question was is it legal just to have a light on the helmet as from a distance, they didn't look like cyclists.

    Under The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 and its subsequent amendments, cyclists must have a white front light and red rear light lit at night (sundown to sunrise). Now the regulations don't specify whether the lights have to be fitted to the bike or can be attached to clothing and helmets (some cycling clothing and helmets now come with lights built in) so it's probable that the cyclists you encountered weren't doing anything illegal, just daft.

    Anything that increases the viability of cyclists is a good thing but I personally don't think it's wise to substitute a light on a helmet for lights fixed to the bike. I think the helmet light should be in addition to the fixed lights. I don't make the rules though.
    Tilt wrote: »
    The ones I encountered were riding on a narrow country road and they were riding in a bunch and not single file.

    Cyclists don't always have to ride in single file. Rule 66 of the Highway Code state that cyclists should never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends. However, in your case as it was a narrow road they should have been single file.

    Reasons for cyclist riding two abreast are:
    1. It's safer. Motorists usually have to overtake in a proper manner rather than overtaking in the same lane as the cyclists. If a group of cyclists are in single file, motorists will often assume they can overtake in places which are not safe and will not leave the cyclist enough room
    2. Motorists can overtake quicker. It allows the motorist to overtake the group of cyclists quicker as there is less distance between the front and rear of the group (about half!!). This means that the motorist is past the group in less time, spending less time on the other side of the road and along side the group of cyclists and therefore safer all round.
    3. It's sociable. :)
  • Car_54
    Car_54 Posts: 8,209 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Pixie5740 wrote: »
    Under The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 and its subsequent amendments, cyclists must have a white front light and red rear light lit at night (sundown to sunrise). Now the regulations don't specify whether the lights have to be fitted to the bike or can be attached to clothing and helmets (some cycling clothing and helmets now come with lights built in) so it's probable that the cyclists you encountered weren't doing anything illegal, just daft.

    Illegal. Section 12(1) says: "Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while the vehicle is in motion."
  • jimjames
    jimjames Posts: 17,596 Forumite
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    edited 14 October 2016 at 5:01PM
    trinidadone wrote: »
    I am keen to hear from motorists only!!
    What about motorists that are also cyclists? Who might actually have more understanding of the situation?

    It annoys the hell out of me when motorists don't indicate or are using their mobile phones when driving. I don't tar all with the same brush though.
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Your in London and you get stuck behind cyclists? For what? The 10 seconds it takes to reach the next queue?
    Very true. The OP seems to be completely missing the point that cyclists are reducing the number of cars on the road and therefore the queue in front of them is actually smaller than it would otherwise be if those cyclists were in a car instead.
    Remember the saying: if it looks too good to be true it almost certainly is.
  • Johno100
    Johno100 Posts: 5,259 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    edited 14 October 2016 at 5:37PM
    jimjames wrote: »
    Very true. The OP seems to be completely missing the point that cyclists are reducing the number of cars on the road and therefore the queue in front of them is actually smaller than it would otherwise be if those cyclists were in a car instead.

    That might be partly true if they weren't taking away large swathes of road space previously available to all road users and converting it into segregated cycle lanes for the Lycra elite.
  • Strider590
    Strider590 Posts: 11,874 Forumite
    Johno100 wrote: »
    That might be partly true if they weren't taking away large swathes of road space previously available to all road users and converting it into segregated cycle lanes for the Lycra elite.

    See this is the attitude that causes problems.........

    They're not "elite" they don't think they are anything special, they don't think they have more rights than you, they're just trying to get to work without being killed.
    “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”

    <><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards