Was this car in the wrong?

boliston

asbokid wrote: »

Well that's the key..

The cyclist made a mistake - and that is what it was - of hugging the curb, up until he reached the roadworks, whereupon he forfeited priority....

If the road only has one lane in each direction then the vehicle with "priority" is the one at the front, regardless of distance from the curb.

Any vehicle overtaking a cyclist on the approach to roadworks should take the same care as if they were overtaking any other vehicle.

asbokid

boliston wrote: »

If the road only has one lane in each direction then the vehicle with "priority" is the one at the front, regardless of distance from the curb.

Any vehicle overtaking a cyclist on the approach to roadworks should take the same care as if they were overtaking any other vehicle.

I'm sure that's true. The motorist didn't observe the cyclist's priority, but a confident cyclist would have established and maintained a lane position that ensured his priority on the road.

These situations show why a happy-go-lucky nine year old should not be cycling on the road.

rotate

In some ways I am looking forward to the day that petrol prices hit £2/litre or higher, so that all the self rightous car drivers might actually have to get on a cycle. They will then they will realise just what an unnerving experience it is for cyclists trying to turn right or proceeding round a roundabout and please don't start me off about car drivers parking in bike lanes or cycle only access points.

Norman_Castle

The cyclist should have anticipated their obstruction to his path by moving towards the centre of the lane, and staying there. He should have made that manoeuvre in plenty of time to warn other road users, where necessary, indicating beforehand.

Indicating in this instance would have been wrong. The cyclist was not changing lane or turning right. The overtake was poorly judged by the motorist and his response to the cyclists complaint shows his contempt for cyclists.

While there are some similarities in the advised road position between motorcycles and pedal cycles, they would not apply in this video due to the different speeds each is capable of maintaining.

asbokid

thelawnet wrote: »

It is certainly not negligent, the one responsible for executing the maneuver safely is the overtaker, the near side obstructions are clearly visible as is the cyclist in front, and the driver is responsible for overtaking safely and has a special duty towards the more vulnerable road user. If you are driving behind a bicycle they do not restrict your view and you really should be watching the road and them carefully because bicycles do need to 'wobble' - potholes, slippery drain covers. You wouldn't overtake a car approaching those roadworks and you shouldn't do it to a bicycle.

That is a classic mistake made by every type of road user. We live 75 yards from a driving test centre and I watch the same mistake being committed every day. I could probably make an educated guess on who will pass and who will fail the driving test based solely on the road position they take when leaving the centre. It is "road cowardice" to drive too near the curb. I guess it's forgivable when you're a cyclist, but that's no consolation if it costs you your life.

Cyclists are a bit slower and are advised to cycle either in primary (centre of the lane) or secondary (near the left of the lane) depending on the road. In this video I believe he rides in secondary because the road is fast and wide enough for cars to pass him, it would have made him safer to take the lane earlier but sometimes this is isn't possible - you get a stream of cars overtaking you and cannot move out till the last minute.

There are no exact measurements for these two cycling positions though. They would depend on the dimensions of the carriageway, and on the obstacles ahead.

Check out the important frames from the youtube footage, the cyclist should have positioned himself much further out into the lane, and stayed there. Instead, he finds himself cycling ridiculously close to the roadworks.

Basically, he's self-conscious about his road speed, and he's trying to be a considerate road user by overcompensating with his lane position.

Norman_Castle

There are roadworks on the left and oncoming traffic. Despite this the car still overtook. The last clips show the space left. 40" at most for a cycle which is approx 2 foot wide.

asbokid

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Indicating in this instance would have been wrong. The cyclist was not changing lane or turning right.

I wasn't talking about that particular cyclist. I was giving a hypothetical example in which a road user, whether a cyclist or a driver, finds himself coming to a halt behind an obstacle, whether or not that is through his own "mistake" in not holding a correct lane position beforehand.

When the road user does finally move off to manoeuvre around the obstacle, he should indicate.

I often find myself stuck behind people who have parked on yellow lines, some 18" from the curb, just before a set of traffic lights. They look like they are waiting for the lights to change, but they're actually just waiting for the nearby takeaway to cook their order.

In that case, the parked cars are obviously in the wrong, but it's my mistake in thinking that they had formed a queue for the lights. When the lights change to green and the parked cars don't move, it's my obligation to signal before moving around them.

This is not so much a question of what is technically correct, but how best to salvage the situation and safeguard your own safety after a mistake.

I would say that the cyclist endangered himself unnecessarily. He should have taken a more commanding position in the lane, long before he reached the roadworks.

Since he failed to do that, a glance over his shoulder as he approached the roadworks, and the sight of the Subaru approaching at speed, would have been remedied best by slowing down and indicating with his right arm that he was intending to move across the lane to avoid the roadworks.

DCodd

thelawnet wrote: »

Perhaps you live in a different Surrey from me. Anyway, it doesn't help tired road users if you ride where they can't see you.

So do you live anywhere near Box Hill? Do you see the pro teams training there?

Bongles

asbokid wrote: »

I wasn't talking about that particular cyclist. I was giving a hypothetical example in which a road user, whether a cyclist or a driver, finds himself coming to a halt behind an obstacle, whether or not that is through his own "mistake" in not holding a correct lane position beforehand.

When the road user does finally move off to manoeuvre around the obstacle, he should indicate.

Only if there's someone there to see the signal, and without the signal your intentions wouldn't be clear (both of which may well be the case in your example). And signalling might be inadvisable if your signal might be misinterpreted.

asbokid wrote: »

I often find myself stuck behind people who have parked on yellow lines, some 18" from the curb, just before a set of traffic lights. They look like they are waiting for the lights to change, but they're actually just waiting for the nearby takeaway to cook their order.

In that case, the parked cars are obviously in the wrong, but it's my mistake in thinking that they had formed a queue for the lights. When the lights change to green and the parked cars don't move, it's my obligation to signal before moving around them.

Your obligation is not to signal - that's too simplistic. Your obligation is to communicate effecively with other road users. Never signal for anything as a matter of course without considering who you are trying to communicate with, what you are trying to say, and whether they might interpret your signal to mean something else.

asbokid

Bongles wrote: »

asbokid wrote: »

I often find myself stuck behind people who have parked on yellow lines, some 18" from the curb, just before a set of traffic lights. They look like they are waiting for the lights to change, but they're actually just waiting for the nearby takeaway to cook their order.

In that case, the parked cars are obviously in the wrong, but it's my mistake in thinking that they had formed a queue for the lights. When the lights change to green and the parked cars don't move, it's my obligation to signal before moving around them.

Your obligation is not to signal - that's too simplistic. Your obligation is to communicate effecively with other road users.

Exactly how do you "communicate effectively" your intention to move off, without using an indicator?

When you have decided to perform a manoeuvre of that type, you should always indicate, whether or not there are other road users in your immediate vision.

You would automatically fail the driving test for telling the examiner that you indicate "Only if there's someone there to see the signal".

Even cars that are seemingly parked are other road users who should be warned of your intentions.

Back to the cyclist..

Through his poor management of lane position, he trapped himself behind some roadworks. He left it too late to move into a safer road position.

He had two choices, at that point... One was a good choice but one was bad.

He could wobble out into the lane to avoid the roadworks, making no indication and hoping that other motorists would respect his road space. That's the worse choice but that's what this cyclist did.

Or..

He could check behind him to see whether any vehicles were approaching. They were approaching at speed, so he should slow down, if necessary to a halt, indicating to his right, before waiting until the road is clear to move out.

.