Very nearly wiped out a cyclist

GDB2222

Mildly_Miffed said:

GDB2222 said:

It seems sensible for people to wear bright clothing on these very dark nights. If someone has been killed or suffered serious injury, it seems pretty futile to apportion blame after the event. Far better to avoid the event altogether by taking sensible precautions.  

This works both ways, of course.

The onus is on the road user emerging from a side road to be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that there is no other road user coming, and that it's clear and safe to do so.

The OP did not do that. They thought they did, but they missed a road user who was approaching.

That other road user may or may not have missed opportunities ways to make themselves more visible - HC rule 59 is "should", not "must" - but they had lights on...

He will have been right where I was looking ... except I didn't see him.

And yet they were clearly visible on the dashcam footage.

Yes, I absolutely agree that it works both ways. It’s generally the motorist's obligation to avoid cyclists and pedestrians. After the accident the motorist may well be punished. Maybe even get jailed. None of this helps the injured cyclist, though. 

It’s so easy to wear bright reflective clothing and use bright cycle lights. Why don’t more people do it?

user1977

B0bbyEwing said:

Mildly_Miffed said:

And yet they were clearly visible on the dashcam footage.

I'm a cyclist & I think safety gear should meet a standard like with cars. You shouldn't be allowed to just slap a cheap waste of time light on your bike & because that's the box ticked then you're A-ok. A cyclist should be required to have lighting to a standard & reflective clothing in the dark should be a requirement & anyone found cycling without wearing that should be penalised. 

In what way would that differ from the current law?

B0bbyEwing

user1977 said:

B0bbyEwing said:

Mildly_Miffed said:

And yet they were clearly visible on the dashcam footage.

I'm a cyclist & I think safety gear should meet a standard like with cars. You shouldn't be allowed to just slap a cheap waste of time light on your bike & because that's the box ticked then you're A-ok. A cyclist should be required to have lighting to a standard & reflective clothing in the dark should be a requirement & anyone found cycling without wearing that should be penalised. 

In what way would that differ from the current law?

I'll be honest, I don't actually know what the current law is. Based on the number of people on bikes I see who wear what I consider inadequate gear I would've said that the requirements are lacking.

Perhaps that's not it. Maybe the law is there & the requirements are adequate. Maybe it just falls in to yet another case of needs better policing which isn't going to happen. Much like when you report people with no tax, MOT or insurance (or all 3) and the police couldn't care less. Even better, they argue you shouldn't be reporting no MOT offenders to them yet .gov website says that's exactly who you should report to.

So maybe it comes under the category of "can't be bothered" & they'll only be bothered when a cyclist is killed. Then they've got no choice but to start looking in to it. Doesn't help the dead cyclist though. Bit late for that guy.



I actually took the same turning tonight & I think there was possibly a mixture of things going on with this.

Now unlike has been painted by some others, I was looking constantly to my right and saw nothing. No movement. Only once the guy was mostly across my front end.
The design of my car is actually poor. The A pillar design is quite obstructed & I haven't driven it all that much. This isn't me making an excuse. I should've looked better I suppose. It's just saying how it is - the view is poor. 

That was then made worse by someone who seemed to be wanting to camouflage themselves rather than make themselves seen. 
Could've both done better at what we were doing I suppose.

I still maintain though - I'd have got in trouble but I'd have been alive. The other guy could've ended up dead (for arguments sake. Probably not with the speed involved), so if I was putting my body against 1.50ton I'd be making myself as bright & visible as possible.

HedgehogRulez

Sounds like pretty poor attempt at victim blaming a vulnerable road user to excuse shoddy driving behaviour by the OP.

GDB2222

HedgehogRulez said:

Sounds like pretty poor attempt at victim blaming a vulnerable road user to excuse shoddy driving behaviour by the OP.

Is your point that cyclists should take no responsibility for their own safety?   If so, I disagree. 

LightFlare

HedgehogRulez said:

Sounds like pretty poor attempt at victim blaming a vulnerable road user to excuse shoddy driving behaviour by the OP.

Yes and no

as already discussed, in the event of a coming together, the driver would almost certainly be found to be at fault.

However - as a cyclist, you must be aware that you will always come off worse against a vehicle and thus should (imo) take some reasonable precautions at self preservation - be it clothing,lights or just plain awareness/defensive riding (or a mix of all 3)

An appreciation that in low light conditions whilst a pedestrian or cyclist may have adequate visibility a driver however may not

Thats my take anyway as both a driver and occasional cyclist

Mildly_Miffed

GDB2222 said:

HedgehogRulez said:

Sounds like pretty poor attempt at victim blaming a vulnerable road user to excuse shoddy driving behaviour by the OP.

Is your point that cyclists should take no responsibility for their own safety?   If so, I disagree. 

Nobody has said the cyclist shouldn't have been making more effort to make themselves visible. Nobody... So, no.

But that's beside the point.
The cyclist was there. With lights on their bike.
The OP admits they were clearly visible when they revisited the dashcam footage.

As far as "Some crappy temu waste-of-time lights" goes, that's quite a bit of insight for a very quick glimpse... And somebody seems to have forgotten what bike lights were like before cheap ubiquitous LEDs.

Remember how mediocre these were? Even in that brief window where the huge pile of batteries was doing something worthwhile...

...and then there were those awful tyre-driven dynamo ones. A glow-worm if you were moving relatively slowly, like you would be through traffic...

Bet these are FAR more visible... For a FIVER, for the pair... From Halfrauds...
https://www.halfords.com/cycling/bike-accessories/bike-lights/halfords-super-slim-led-bike-light-set-476350.html

Sea_Shell

There's been a series on TV about crash investigations.

In serious cases, they reconstruct what could actually be seen, which can differ greatly from dashcam or CCTV footage, especially as in hindsight you know what you're looking for.

It's not always the vehicle drivers fault, even if they have hit (and even killed ) a pedestrian/🛴/cyclist.

B0bbyEwing

Wow. A few persistent trolls here who either can't read (don't believe this to be the case) or are 'wannabe barristers' & by that I mean take something someone said, turn it 180 degrees & say they said something else instead. 

Just posting this to let you know that I can see what you're up to & you may be dangling that fishing rod but I'll not be taking a bite. 

born_again

HedgehogRulez said:

Sounds like pretty poor attempt at victim blaming a vulnerable road user to excuse shoddy driving behaviour by the OP.

It is time that regulation was updated that in case like this. That should a cyclist etc be injured that what they were wearing or their style of riding is taken into consideration, as part of the cause of their demise.
Maybe will/might just make them realise that you have to take responsibility for your personal safety. 

So that the likes of Little Jimmy Who is a angel & never does anything wrong. Yet is spotted many times riding in black clothing, no lights in the dark on one wheel, on wrong side of the road taunting drivers to hit them. Means that should a driver hit them, that driver walks away Scott free & little Jimmy gets just what they deserved.