We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Hyperthetical question - pulling in to the path of a cyclist
Comments
-
The reference to chevrons, with solid lines [boundaries] is for motorways and dual carriageways....]
The boundary ones are, but the double white line system on ordinary roads can have the two lines up to 1200mm apart, with chevrons, so to cross them would be an offence. If the lines are over 1200mm they would have the two lines on one side and a single on the other.0 -
There's no such thing as right of way.All the blame falls on the driver as the cyclist has a clear right of way.
Clearly the car driver should give way and not assume that just because the van driver's stopped that cyclists will as well. (Cyclists are generally more reluctant to stop to let people out than drivers not (usually) because they're rude !!!!!!s, but because it's more effort to accelerate from stationary again on a bike than in a car). But the cyclist also has a certain responsibility to be aware of the situation up ahead and be ready for the possibility that the driver may pull out anyway. Whether that's enough to amount to contributory negligence I don't know. I suspect not in most circumstances, but maybe if he was riding head down at excessive speed...This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident.
(The swear filter made the word I just used look ruder than it actually was...)0 -
If you ever do an advanced driving course, they will teach you all about hazard awareness.
In aware of the hazards of the roads, I am a professional driver and do about 40k miles per year and had on undertake a driver awareness program as part of my job -- but in reality not all risks can be eradicated by just a single party. We all have to work together to create a safe environment. But it would seem cyclists can put themselves in a dangerous position and have little comeuppance. IMO I think in this situation the cyclist should be held partially responsible, however it seems the law isn't on my side here, which was what this thread was about.0 -
The reference to chevrons, with solid lines [boundaries] is for motorways and dual carriageways...the 'chevrons'.
What is being discussed here are the hatched 'separation' markings down the centre of a carriageway.
And in that example, there is only one road marking listed in the Highway Code [#130]...and that is, the hatched road marking with broken line [boundary].
The similar marking, with 'solid' line boundary,was deleted a couple of years ago, as it was in fact not covered by any[lawful] regulation....and nobody realised!
Therefore, it was 'unenforceable!'
To rectify the matter without too much re-painting, Local Authorities simply created a double solid continuous line, which isn't a 'boundary' marking, but of course, means...'do not cross', except, etc etc.....if the LA did not wish vehicles to enter the diagonal striped area under any circumstances [apart from an emergency]
I think this is what your talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFR2eA50jLM
What bugs me is people think you can't overtake on these, but they're little more than extra wide broken lines. The guy in the white van, did as expected, flash his headlights at me.“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 \/ \/ \/0 -
All this talk about an undertaking cyclist doesn't seem to acknowledge the point that they probably weren't, in that the van probably overtook them and then slowed down. If every cyclist slowed down every time a vehicle alongside them slowed down they'd never get anywhere (the vehicle could be turning right, for example). If people held back from passing, because they were actually looking far enough ahead, then the cyclist would have more chance to assess the situation. In those circumstances I'd probably accelerate to get out of the danger area and allow the crossing.
It begs the question whether the motorist crossing would risk the same manouevre if the van in the outside lane slowed but there was a car in the nearside lane. I suspect the issue wouldn't arise, which answers the question...0 -
I am a driver and cyclist. If a van stopped to let me turn right in front of it, I would be proceeding with caution in case there was a cyclist or motor cycle that I was not in my view. Bit like taking care when passing a bus that has just stopped or a parked ice cream van.In aware of the hazards of the roads, I am a professional driver and do about 40k miles per year and had on undertake a driver awareness program as part of my job -- but in reality not all risks can be eradicated by just a single party. We all have to work together to create a safe environment. But it would seem cyclists can put themselves in a dangerous position and have little comeuppance. IMO I think in this situation the cyclist should be held partially responsible, however it seems the law isn't on my side here, which was what this thread was about.0 -
I'm a driver and a cyclist too.
There is a significant amount of idiocy on both sides. And yes, in my experience, cyclists use the roads with particular abandon.
Yes, there is no legal requirement to use cycle paths, sure all responsibility for your actions go on the average motorist... but surely a modicum of common sense or safety is just standard? But all the time, when cycling, I feel like I'm the only one in a cycle lane, I'm the only one that doesn't run red lights, I'm the only one who seems to acknowledge the fact that there are cars on the road and, what astonishes me, I'm the only one most of the time wearing a cycle helmet. Surely if you're playing chicken with a car driver, it's just common sense to try and be a little bit safe?0 -
True, but this thread was about legal liability in one particular scenarioI'm a driver and a cyclist too.
There is a significant amount of idiocy on both sides. And yes, in my experience, cyclists use the roads with particular abandon.
Yes, there is no legal requirement to use cycle paths, sure all responsibility for your actions go on the average motorist... but surely a modicum of common sense or safety is just standard? But all the time, when cycling, I feel like I'm the only one in a cycle lane, I'm the only one that doesn't run red lights, I'm the only one who seems to acknowledge the fact that there are cars on the road and, what astonishes me, I'm the only one most of the time wearing a cycle helmet. Surely if you're playing chicken with a car driver, it's just common sense to try and be a little bit safe?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards