Some people are too stupid to have a licence!!

johnfarquhar74

Strider590 wrote: »

A cyclist wouldn't have been traveling at 25-30mpg... I'd have seen them when I checked my drivers side mirror. But they would not have overtaken a car that's indicating right.

Actually, a cyclist can achieve that speed no problem, if by 25-30mpg you mean 25-30mph!

Strider590 wrote: »

Some chav idiot on a moped might have overtaken where she did, but i'd hear a moped a mile away.

yet you didn't hear a car?

Strider590 wrote: »

A motorcyclist would not have overtaken due to the potential oncoming white van and my indicator flashing.

but both a cyclist and moped rider would have?!?

Strider590 wrote: »

Finally.... Emergency vehicles would have the siren going in such compacted traffic....

and you would have seen them in your blindspot before or after you heard them?!?

Strider590 wrote: »

So the moot point is infact yours.

'fraid not me ol' china, you moved from a stationary position without checking your blindspot. In a legal sense you might just get away with it this time but I have highlighted a few reasons where otherwise, you would not have.

I'll give you a wee tip for gratis, treat all road users as idiots, that's those in-front, beside, and behind you!

johnfarquhar74

Strider590 wrote: »

But they would not have overtaken a car that's indicating right.

Strider590 wrote: »

A motorcyclist would not have overtaken due to the,,,indicator flashing.

Sorry, forgot to say, indicating gives you no right to pull out and is exactly what it says on the tin, an indication of ones intention.

mikey72

johnfarquhar74 wrote: »

Sorry, forgot to say, indicating gives you no right to pull out and is exactly what it says on the tin, an indication of ones intention.

That's ok, I don't indicate anyway. I also have the radio so loud I don't hear anything outside either.

johnfarquhar74

mikey72 wrote: »

That's ok, I don't indicate anyway. I also have the radio so loud I don't hear anything outside either.

Lucky B! you probably can't hear any of those vuvuzelas that are drowning out a perfectly good game of football!
Seriously though, I was taught that all other road users are idiots, that includes my other half, but a car that deviates without indicating is better than a car that does and does so without checking its blindspot!
Let us clarify, indicating gives you no right to change your road position, this includes when joining an A-road or M-way from a slip road!

marmitedog

mikey72 wrote: »

I'm with strider on this, our village has the same problem, and there are people that don't want to wait, and will pass the waiting cars, and try to push their way through on the wrong side of the road.
I did have a cyclist pass me on the right a couple of weeks ago, and I nearly got him, I stopped in time, he got a shock. But it was too close for comfort.

Not sure of your point here - what was the cyclist doing wrong that caused you to nearly hit them?

For the record, If I haven't caused the queue, I'm not willing to wait in it. So in the car, I wait in line, on the bike I filter past (on the right usually).

If I'm stuck in the car queue, I don't hinder others from making free progress.

Gavin83

Maybe the people around just didn't see the accident, or even wasn't sure who to side with?

I'd be amazed if this didn't go 50/50, especially as you've no way to prove you were indicating and used your mirror. Be sure to come back and let us know the outcome.

cyclonebri1

johnfarquhar74 wrote: »

Actually, a cyclist can achieve that speed no problem, if by 25-30mpg you mean 25-30mph!



yet you didn't hear a car?



but both a cyclist and moped rider would have?!?



and you would have seen them in your blindspot before or after you heard them?!?



'fraid not me ol' china, you moved from a stationary position without checking your blindspot. In a legal sense you might just get away with it this time but I have highlighted a few reasons where otherwise, you would not have.

I'll give you a wee tip for gratis, treat all road users as idiots, that's those in-front, beside, and behind you!

You missed out "including yourself" from that last sentence,

skiddlydiddly

The indicating and looking in the mirror is a lot harder to disprove though than the act of being hit in the side.The former might/might not have happened, the latter definitely did.
I know its possible to prove whether brake lights were in action on a rear impact as the bulbs break and its something to do with them being on when exposed to the air that can prove if they were or weren't.Not really relevant here though.

It will be interesting to see how she portrays it.If there are no witnesses she could easily say Strider was parked up and pulled out hitting her, making it seem like its 100% his fault.Obviously his camera will prove otherwise and she'll get a nasty shock if she does.

johnfarquhar74

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

You missed out "including yourself" from that last sentence,

I'd like to think that when I'm on the road I know what I'm doing and don't have to second guess myself. That doesn't mean to say I'm in the right or am a perfect driver, but by assuming that 'all' other road users are idiots it puts you in good stead for when things go awry, off course, I'm pleasantly suprised when I find that 99% of road users are not idiots but it takes a while to work out who the other 1% are!

Paradigm

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Ther's an old adage that you would do well to remember Strider and this is without trying to be condescending, "expect the unexpected", do that and you should fair better.

I have to,I'm hungover & I can't help meself

If you're expecting the unexpected then surely it's then not unexpected... is it?

I'll get me coat