Cyclists undertaking: what's the penalty (if any)?

Car_54

Johno100 wrote: »

And/or put your wheels in the left hand gutter to prevent anybody physically coming up your inside.

Thus obstructing a cycle lane?

SouthLondonUser

Well, when there is no cycle lane, this (moving as far as possible to the left so that cyclists don't undertake me) is precisely what I try to do, on both 2 and 4 wheels. To be clear, I couldn't care less if a cyclist is faster than me, but I do care about reducing the risk of collisions with idiots. You'll be surprised how many times cyclists hit the (arguably wide) topbox at the back of my motorcycle, thinking they could squeeze through on my left.

custardy

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

Being undertaken by cyclists at junctions and bends in London has become so common that I have started wondering: is it even an offence? What penalty, if any, can cyclists receive for this? Does it actually ever happen (that cyclists are caught and fined)?

It often happens when I’m riding my motorcycle and a bicycle undertakes me while we both go through the same bend. However, a few days ago I was at the Elephant and Castle roundabout in London, driving a car; I was in the leftmost lane, waiting at the red light to, well, turn left, when I saw in the mirror a cyclist filtering like a madman (it can be legal if done sensibly – he wasn’t doing it sensibly) and stopping at my left. When the light turned green, he undertook me and went straight instead of turning left; the sheer stupidity was so baffling my jaw dropped to the floor. The lane was clearly marked with left arrows to indicate you can only turn left, but, even if it weren’t, undertaking a car that has been signalling to go left is just ridiculously stupid.

Note I don’t mean to turn this into yet another “us vs them” type of rant; I don’t need cyclists to remind me they are vulnerable and that car drivers are guilty of more nefarious offences. I am genuinely asking what can, theoretically and realistically, happen when/if a cyclist gets caught pulling a stunt like this.

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

Well, when there is no cycle lane, this (moving as far as possible to the left so that cyclists don't undertake me) is precisely what I try to do, on both 2 and 4 wheels. To be clear, I couldn't care less if a cyclist is faster than me, but I do care about reducing the risk of collisions with idiots. You'll be surprised how many times cyclists hit the (arguably wide) topbox at the back of my motorcycle, thinking they could squeeze through on my left.

Gotcha........

SouthLondonUser

Guilty as charged

Johno100

Car_54 wrote: »

Thus obstructing a cycle lane?

What cycle lane?

Car_54

Johno100 wrote: »

What cycle lane?

If there's an advanced stop line there has to be at least a few yards of cycle lane to enable cyclists to move into the "cycle box" without crossing the stop line.

Johno100

Car_54 wrote: »

If there's an advanced stop line there has to be at least a few yards of cycle lane to enable cyclists to move into the "cycle box" without crossing the stop line.

There should be, but not always and I am talking generally.

Nasqueron

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

@Naqueron: so, if I understand correctly, undertaking while a vehicle is indicating (ie the cyclist and the vehicle going in the same direction) is not explicitly illegal but it is effectively left to the discretion of the courts/police if it is considered "dangerous cyclcing"? Is this correct?
How about what the genius did, staying on my left then going straight while I had indicated to turn left (in a lane from which you were supposed to turn left only)? Is this an explicit offence or, again, is it all down to the discretion of the police/courts?

You keep using the wrong word.

Undertaking is what cars do, specifically moving left, passing a vehicle and moving back out right again.

Filtering is what bikes and motorbikes can do, specifically passing through stationary or slow moving traffic.

It is not illegal (but it is stupid) to filter past a vehicle indicating left as you're likely to get hit and end up with the bill, it is similarly stupid to try and go straight on from alongside a car indicating left in a left hand turn lane. You might get done for careless cycling if the police deemed it worth prosecuting but it's more likely to be a civil insurance issue

Car_54

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

How about what the genius did, staying on my left then going straight while I had indicated to turn left (in a lane from which you were supposed to turn left only)? Is this an explicit offence or, again, is it all down to the discretion of the police/courts?

The cyclist sounds like an idiot, but ...

Direction arrows are not mandatory

The HC (rule 77) allows cyclists to keep to the LH lane on roundabouts - with suitable warnings about signalling and extra care.

SouthLondonUser

@Nasqueron, @Car54, thanks for the clarifications. I admit I didn't remember rule 77; I dare say it seems quite stupid, to be honest. AFAIK there is also no obligation to wait in the cyclists' box when it is feasible to do so, nor to use a cycle lane where available.