False accusation

bouicca21

As someone who both drives and cycles (and does have liability insurance when riding the bike) …

standard advice to cyclists is not to undertake a car.  Very few drivers actually regularly check their near side mirrors and so don’t realise there might be a bike in the way.  If there isn’t a lot of space between cyclist and car, the slightest drift to the left can cause an accident.  

If the cyclist did undertake, especially on a narrow road, then he/she was daft. In practice it can be difficult to overtake on the right so I hang back (thus annoying the drivers behind, who can’t bear being behind a bike and desperately want to close the gap).  If the cyclist undertook and then fell then OP may well have drifted slightly.  In terms of responsibility, it’s probably a wash.

user1977

It depends what people mean by "undertaking", but "filtering" is legal for cyclists and motorcyclists, and not generally cautioned against.

Car_54

user1977 said:

It depends what people mean by "undertaking", but "filtering" is legal for cyclists and motorcyclists, and not generally cautioned against.

The Highway Code certainly cautions against it, except in certain circumstances. Rule 163.

[Deleted User]

bouicca21 said:

As someone who both drives and cycles (and does have liability insurance when riding the bike) …

standard advice to cyclists is not to undertake a car.  Very few drivers actually regularly check their near side mirrors and so don’t realise there might be a bike in the way.  If there isn’t a lot of space between cyclist and car, the slightest drift to the left can cause an accident.  

If the cyclist did undertake, especially on a narrow road, then he/she was daft. In practice it can be difficult to overtake on the right so I hang back (thus annoying the drivers behind, who can’t bear being behind a bike and desperately want to close the gap).  If the cyclist undertook and then fell then OP may well have drifted slightly.  In terms of responsibility, it’s probably a wash.

Look at it this way. If a vehicle coming the other way is a bit close to the centre line, or a motorcycle comes up the outside, there is a good chance that cars will move to the left. You don't want to be cycling there when they do.

Hang back and move to the centre of the lane for maximum visibility and to ensure plenty of space.

ontheroad1970

The_Unready said:

Android07 said:

You should have stayed in your car and drove off. Trying to be a good person lands in you all sorts of trouble.

When the police contacted you, you could have given the dashcam footage and that's it. Cyclists do not have insurance and you certainly don't need to exchange details.

That bit is incorrect. I, and many others like me, have 3rd party liability insurance through my membership of British Cycling. See here:

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/thirdpartyliability

Other cyclists will have similar policies with other insurers/organisations. I'm not saying that it would cover the scenario above, but I need to correct your statement, which is just plain wrong..

The whole of it is incorrect.  Driving off carries the risk of a custodial sentence.  Low risk, but it is one of the options open to magistrates in sentencing.

user1977

Car_54 said:

user1977 said:

It depends what people mean by "undertaking", but "filtering" is legal for cyclists and motorcyclists, and not generally cautioned against.

The Highway Code certainly cautions against it, except in certain circumstances. Rule 163.

It advises to proceed with caution, not that it shouldn’t be done. Equally, other road users should be alert to the possibility of bikes passing them.

Okell

bouicca21 said:

... In terms of responsibility, it’s probably a wash.

Sorry, but what is "a wash"?

Okell

Android07 said:

You should have stayed in your car and drove off...

Without knowing exactly what happened that suggestion is as daft as your plan to sell your brother's car for around £4000 but only pay him £1500!

DullGreyGuy said:

[Deleted User] said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Didier2000 said:

I am considering pursuing legal action against the cyclist for falsely accusing me and causing unnecessary stress and financial strain, especially in light of the police's conclusion.

I would greatly appreciate any guidance or advice on how to initiate a legal process against this individual for their actions. Your input is highly valued.

What financial strain?

Having not seen the video footage makes things a little difficult but having dealt with disputed liability cases in Motor (mainly before dash cam was a thing) the reality is two people can genuinely come away from the same incident with different views of what happened. The classic is the narrow lane collision when both are positive they stopped in time and it was the other party that went into them... clearly two stationary cars cannot hit each other so one or both are mistaken. 

You apparent agree the cyclist did fall and damage was done, if it wasnt you then why did this happen? What are their allocations against you? You dont have to make contact to be liable for an accident. 

As to your court case... dont bother. Libel claims cannot be heard in the Small Track and so you are exposing yourself to the risk of having to pay their lawyers fees to defend the case. Its going to be hard to prove their intent and you've not provided any evidence of actual financial loss as a consequence of it ("stress", unless involving medication, psychiatrists, therapy etc, is seen as part of life and not a valid head of claim). 

You'll end up spending vast sums of money and never getting anything back.

It sounds like the cyclist tried to undertake when there wasn't space. It's an extremely stupid thing to do, but also very common.

Entering a space where there isn't adequate room, and where the driver has a blind spot, and where a slight moment can result in an accident. Entirely the cyclist's fault.

Cyclists are vulnerable road users and whilst as a pedestrian I truly believe I am much more likely to be hit by a cyclist running a red light etc than a car the reality of courts is that the driver of the 2 tonne metal box has the greater duty of care...

As a pedestrian, cyclist and driver I agree that as a pedestrian I spend more time and effort ensuring I don't get hit by errant cyclists* (at lights or on the footpath) then I do by cars.  And the only thing more dangerous to a cyclist than a careless or non-observant car driver is a dog walker on a shared use footpath/cyclepath who can't control their animal properly.  It's safer to avoid such cyclepaths and cycle in the road - thus annoying drivers!


*Actually a worse menace to pedestrians are e-scooter riders who ride illegally and at speed on the footpath.  The city I live in started an official trial scheme in October 2020 and unfortunately it's been extended to autumn 2024.  If people can't ride them properly (ie on the road or any other places where bicycles can be legally ridden and not on pedestrian footpaths) then they ought to be banned as the scheme clearly can't be policed properly.  Because of their weight and speed they are much more dangerous to pedestrians when ridden on footpaths than a conventional cycle.

Okell

bouicca21 said:

As someone who both drives and cycles (and does have liability insurance when riding the bike) …

standard advice to cyclists is not to undertake a car.  Very few drivers actually regularly check their near side mirrors and so don’t realise there might be a bike in the way.  If there isn’t a lot of space between cyclist and car, the slightest drift to the left can cause an accident.  

If the cyclist did undertake, especially on a narrow road, then he/she was daft. In practice it can be difficult to overtake on the right so I hang back (thus annoying the drivers behind, who can’t bear being behind a bike and desperately want to close the gap)...

As somebody whose been riding bikes on the roads since 1970 that's pretty much my view too.

The Highway Code might say filtering is OK in certain circumstances but I think any cyclist who does so in anything other than totally stationary traffic is an accident statistic waiting to be recorded.

The only time I pass even queuing stationary traffic is if it's at lights with a stop box for cyclists at the front, and I'm 100% confident I can use the nearside cyclelane to get to the front of the stop box before the lights change and the traffic moves off.  Otherwise I just join the queue like a car would.

There's a junction like that just round the corner from our house and the number of near misses I see is frightening.  Cyclists continue to undertake in the cyclelane even though traffic has started moving and cars are indicating to turn left at the junction just 20 yds ahead.  Madness.

Yes- if there's a collision it'll be the driver's fault for not checking their nearside mirror and blindspot, but as a cyclist why put yourself in such a dangerous position in the first place?

bouicca21

Okell said:

bouicca21 said:

... In terms of responsibility, it’s probably a wash.

Sorry, but what is "a wash"?

Both equally to blame.