cyclists turned right when i overtook

almillar

My insurance company tell me that his story is that he was turning right into the cycle lane and that I should have predicted that he would do this. I think this is absurd and unfair.

So your insurance company told you this about a non accident.

Hehe! Oh, I do hope you remembered to tell your insurance company that this crash was hypothetical!!

Throbbe

Nobbie1967 wrote: »

It's funny, but the more you write, the more it is clear that you do not understand what constitutes safe driving behaviour.

Ok, lets be honest, it seems pretty certain that the whole thing is a fabrication, probably from a bored teenager. Nonetheless, if it genuinely represents someone's understanding of appropriate driving, then it's far from funny, it's worrying.

nicechap

Roles reversed here,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3720403/Who-wrong-Furious-row-erupts-undertaking-cyclist-taxi-collide-car-driver-makes-right-turn-without-indicating.html

bod1467

I'd put that as 50:50 ... the taxi should have indicated, and it also turned too soon as it would have entered the side road opposing oncoming traffic; the other vehicle (cyclist in this case) was overtaking where it wasn't safe to do so - against possible oncoming traffic, where a side road was to be encountered very shortly, and where there was little to no scope for getting back into the correct lane after overtaking.

Was the cyclist aiming to also turn right down that road? (It's not clear, but I suspect not. I suspect that this cyclist is one of the Lycra Terrorists).

facade

I couldn't see any undertaking, was it in America?

The cyclist was overtaking a line of traffic, he should have anticipated that someone might turn into that road, and know they would never see him in their mirror.

Both at fault 60:40 car:cycle I reckon.

If he were undertaking stationary cars then it is usual for passengers to fling the door open in his path, which is why cyclists should go down the outside, not the inside.

I couldn't see any Private Hire plates though, these are usually a dead give away of the most appalling driving and mean you take triple care when anywhere near one (You would think that with all the practice a Private Hire driver gets that they would be able to drive safely, most of the ones I see don't )

Edwood_Woodwood

Deffo the cab driver at fault, he didn't indicate and was cutting the turn so fine that he would have been on the wrong side of the side road with oncoming traffic.

Also, a pedestrian had already started to cross the junction he was attempting to turn into so should have waited anyway for them to cross.

The driver imo didn't look in his mirrors at all. He should have seen the cyclist on the outside, he should have indicated, waited for pedestrian and cyclist, and then proceeded.

Very bad driving.

bigjl

Since when does overtaking take presidence over somebody being overtaken?

I used to work with a bloke that was doing similar to the cyclist on blues, though the car was much further from the junction he pulled out to drive into.

My mate was said to be at fault because he was making a dangerous overtake at too high a speed to react to the other vehicle.

There is only a debate with that online video because cyclists firmly believe they are very rarely if ever at fault.

The car my mate hit never indicated either.

Silver-Surfer_2

Why are you taking this non accident so seriously?

Twopints

kraken776 wrote: »

My insurance company tell me that his story is that he was turning right into the cycle lane and that I should have predicted that he would do this. I think this is absurd and unfair.
However i am worried about it because i have heard stories or people being held responsible in this sort of situation if there is a junction on the right.

When you present fiction as fact, and facts as fiction, why do you expect to be taken seriously? And then get upset when you're not?

kraken776

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Oh, I can. And I have. Several times. And I know I'm right.

And you're still defensive, weeks on, despite insisting the accident didn't take place! So, what stance did your insurers take?

As I have explained before,
Only i know the reasons for my actions because the are subjective.
This means you cannot make any statements about my motives and expect such stattements to have any weight - none.

This is a absolute immutable fact

I have stated that you are wrong about what you claim my motives are and for the reasons explained above this cannot be disputed.
For the same reason any attempt you make to challenge this is worthless and meaningless it does not matter how many times you repeat the message you will always be makeing worthless statements.