Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
Page 4
    • zagfles
    • By zagfles 2nd Jul 12, 7:49 AM
    • 14,931 Posts
    • 13,521 Thanks
    zagfles
    We'll wait for all the IAM drivers to tell us you don't need to indicate. To be fair, I may not in that position. It's a filter lane, where else are you going?
    Originally posted by mikey72
    It wasn't a filter lane - the road is two lanes in that direction and both lanes can go straight on.

    Besides even if it was a filter lane the driver should be indicating - a pedestrian crossing the side road he's turning into won't necessarily know that.

    I had some idiot almost run me over in a similar situation in the town centre. I was crossing a side road as a pedestrian, the motorist was turning left without indicating. Her excuse was that you can only turn left there, which was true as straight on was buses only, but I couldn't see the road signs showing that from where I was.
    • Norman Castle
    • By Norman Castle 2nd Jul 12, 9:57 AM
    • 8,938 Posts
    • 7,898 Thanks
    Norman Castle
    Cyclists do cause damage and they also cause personal injury to pedestrians. They should therefore be insured and registered so they can be held accountable for their actions.
    Cyclist don't need to be insured or registered to be held accountable for their actions. Motorists are required to have third party insurance due to the possible high cost of their liabilities.
    If motorists had to personally pay the full cost of accidents rather than relying on insurance to cover them I expect driving standards would improve.
    Last edited by Norman Castle; 02-07-2012 at 10:13 AM.
    Don't harass a hippie, you'll get bad karma.

    Never trust a newbie with a rtb tale.
    • Limey
    • By Limey 2nd Jul 12, 10:55 AM
    • 433 Posts
    • 255 Thanks
    Limey
    I wouldn't mind refresher courses in driving, but I also think that cycle training at school should be compulsory. I know it may not all sink in but maybe it will go some way to helping with their road awareness.

    There are a lot of cyclists where I live so I always keep an eye out for them but there have been a few incidents where I could not have forseen the actions of the cyclist. In one case I would have needed x-ray vision to see through the truck they cycled out from behind (old biddy crossing the road), fortunately my car had good brakes and I was on the ball so stopped with inches to spare.
    • Crabman
    • By Crabman 2nd Jul 12, 12:55 PM
    • 9,741 Posts
    • 7,171 Thanks
    Crabman
    So that will cut down on cyclist deaths and injuries. which unlike all other oad users,appears to be on the rise (although needs validation on number of cyclists vs accidents)
    The taxi that caused my accident was registered,insured & licenced
    Didnt change anything for me. was he/she held accountable? or did they simply drive off and leave me for dead on the road?
    Originally posted by custardy
    Presumably as you know the taxi was registered & insured, the driver was located by police and prosecuted. Secondly as they were insured you were able to claim damages from their compulsory third-party insurance policy.

    As you're dragging individual circumstances into the discussion, how do you explain the behaviour of a cyclist who, whilst riding on the pavement, knocked over a colleague of mine? She was on crutches for a while as a result and the cyclist was never traced and thus was not held accountable for their actions.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Savings & Investments, ISAs & Tax-free Savings, Public Transport & Cycling, Motoring and Parking Fines, Tickets & Parking Boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Board Guides are not moderators & don't read every post. If you spot a contentious or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com

    • custardy
    • By custardy 2nd Jul 12, 1:05 PM
    • 35,242 Posts
    • 29,930 Thanks
    custardy
    Presumably as you know the taxi was registered & insured, the driver was located by police and prosecuted. Secondly as they were insured you were able to claim damages from their compulsory third-party insurance policy.

    As you're dragging individual circumstances into the discussion, how do you explain the behaviour of a cyclist who, whilst riding on the pavement, knocked over a colleague of mine? She was on crutches for a while as a result and the cyclist was never traced and thus was not held accountable for their actions.
    Originally posted by Crabman
    well given it was a black hack. i would hope it was registered and insured. The taxi was never traced, thus was not held accountable for their actions. thus was not held accountable for their actions.

    the point is how would it have a positive affect on cyclist deaths to register them? or do they deserve what they get because they arent registered?
  • Sgt Pepper
    well given it was a black hack. i would hope it was registered and insured. The taxi was never traced, thus was not held accountable for their actions. thus was not held accountable for their actions.

    the point is how would it have a positive affect on cyclist deaths to register them? or do they deserve what they get because they arent registered?
    Originally posted by custardy
    How many of your cyclist statistics show the cyclist at fault?
    • 1886
    • By 1886 2nd Jul 12, 1:10 PM
    • 494 Posts
    • 435 Thanks
    1886
    I'm a cyclist, both on and off road. When I go on road I only go at certain times of the day and only go on country lanes, try to stick to quiet roads with less traffic.
    Most of the time I go on the road I experience at least one case of dangerous driving towards me. The other day I had a woman in an Audi A1 overtake me just as I was about to go through a chicane i.e where one vehicle has priority over the other. If I had pulled over any further to go through the chicane she would have hit me. I had a vehicle try and overtake me on a very narrow bridge one time too.
    I find the usual reason for this behaviour is impatience. Like when a car behind me overtakes me as a car is about to pass me coming towards me. Why not wait for it to pass?
    There was a woman cyclist killed near me last year who was taking part in a time trial. It must have been awful, other members of the club were riding along and coming across what had happened. The car driver got done for careless driving and something like a four year ban. It makes me sick, she had a husband and children.
    Cyclists are seen as a hazard and a nuisance, Alot of drivers hate us, that`s why they drive so close. They think we have no right to be on the road.
    I did the London to Brighton last year for the third time. 30,000 cylists took the streets back over from the cars and they had to like it.
    • custardy
    • By custardy 2nd Jul 12, 1:18 PM
    • 35,242 Posts
    • 29,930 Thanks
    custardy
    How many of your cyclist statistics show the cyclist at fault?
    Originally posted by Sgt Pepper
    my statistics? unfortunatly ive yet to see accurate figures.(and in many cases blame is subjective or unlclear)
    again you seem to miss the point.
    I don't particularly care who is at fault in the end.
    more so that things improve to cut the chances of dying on the bike.
    The problem is for example.
    had I died on the road after the taxi drove off.
    I would no doubt have been put down as me falling off my bike.
    The irony being I went by road as the 'safer' option, as Edinburgh council refuse to grit even the main cycling routes. In my case our part of a 1000+ mile route NN1.
  • Sgt Pepper
    my statistics? unfortunatly ive yet to see accurate figures.(and in many cases blame is subjective or unlclear)
    again you seem to miss the point.
    I don't particularly care who is at fault in the end.
    more so that things improve to cut the chances of dying on the bike.
    The problem is for example.
    had I died on the road after the taxi drove off.
    I would no doubt have been put down as me falling off my bike.
    The irony being I went by road as the 'safer' option, as Edinburgh council refuse to grit even the main cycling routes. In my case our part of a 1000+ mile route NN1.
    Originally posted by custardy
    I think you'll find that had you died a lot of effort would have been put into finding the driver.

    Or in truth did you really just fall off?
    • custardy
    • By custardy 2nd Jul 12, 1:37 PM
    • 35,242 Posts
    • 29,930 Thanks
    custardy
    I think you'll find that had you died a lot of effort would have been put into finding the driver.

    Or in truth did you really just fall off?
    Originally posted by Sgt Pepper
    what driver? how would they know there was a driver?
  • Sgt Pepper
    what driver? how would they know there was a driver?
    Originally posted by custardy
    So there were no witnesses to your collision and no impact marks on you or your bike?
    • custardy
    • By custardy 2nd Jul 12, 1:49 PM
    • 35,242 Posts
    • 29,930 Thanks
    custardy
    So there were no witnesses to your collision and no impact marks on you or your bike?
    Originally posted by Sgt Pepper
    there were no witnesses as it was 0330
    there were plenty of marks . given i went airborne around 25mph.
    no paint transfer though
    • Skinto_7
    • By Skinto_7 2nd Jul 12, 2:00 PM
    • 258 Posts
    • 363 Thanks
    Skinto_7
    absolutely not. This is just blame shaming - "hmm, cyclist seem to be getting killed a lot - lets train them some more"

    when was the last time a cyclist ran into a car and killed or injured the car driver...hmm practically never? even the cyclist / cyclist or cyclist / pedestrian interface is practically unheard of.

    it's the other way around - driver education - that they don't own the road, that there are vulnerable road users out there for whom they have a duty of care and that they need to just share the damned road a bit better.

    its in the drivers interest to do this also - as every cyclist on the road is probably one less car on the morning commute.
    Originally posted by gkerr4
    What a stupid post.

    The original poster suggested some formal cycling training can only be a good thing, and you say NO.

    Please enlighten us to why this would not be a good thing?

    As for when did a cyclist last kill a driver by running into them, again another stupid point, obviously a bike isnt going to kill anyone in a car if they run into them, however cyclist/driver stupidity cannot be measured by the level of injury caused, a dangerous action is a dangerous action whether injury is caused or not.

    Regarding your paragraph:

    it's the other way around - driver education - that they don't own the road, that there are vulnerable road users out there for whom they have a duty of care and that they need to just share the damned road a bit better..
    Originally posted by gkerr4
    Most drivers would agree further driver education would be a good thing, and i also think most would agree they have a duty of care to anyone they encounter on a road whether they think they should be there or not.
    • Idiophreak
    • By Idiophreak 2nd Jul 12, 2:15 PM
    • 11,635 Posts
    • 15,175 Thanks
    Idiophreak
    Hmm, just my 2c...

    I was very confident on a bike as a kid, did 50 mile rides every Sunday, rode to school and back, to town to see friends and 13 miles each way to my gf's place.

    I completely quit cycling when I went off to uni (and learnt to drive).

    Got a mountain bike a couple of years ago, having seen more stuff driving on the roads, I decided that being well away from traffic was for the best. Used it a bit, then stopped for a while...

    2 weeks ago I got my first road bike, so I can start training for a triathlon. My early impressions of cycling on the road:

    1) For the most part, car drivers are actually a lot safer and more tolerant around cyclists than I thought they'd be. Most leave plenty of room, pass at an appropriate speed and generally respect you.

    2) But there are some that drive like idiots. I've only been out 5 or six times so far, but I've already had:
    * one woman pull out right in front of me as I was travelling down hill at 30mph.
    * three people overtake, slam on brakes and turn left.
    * one bus overtake, slam on brakes, indicate right and (amazingly) flash other traffic out, before realising it couldn't make the turn and austin-powers-ing it in the middle of the road.
    * two people pass with oncoming traffic, coming within a couple of inches of me
    * one person blur past me at 90+ mph.
    * one woman honk her horn because I was riding in the right hand lane...How else she expected me to get to the right hand filter lane is a mystery to me.
    * one police car deciding that whilst overtaking me was a good moment to put the siren on...scared the bejesus out of me!

    These are probably the most dangerous things I've seen, but there are plenty more instances of people being plain inconsiderate...Like when I'm coasting up to the back of traffic and people decide to overtake me and slam on the brakes....Would they overtake another car that was coasting up to the back of traffic? So why do it to a cyclist?

    It's clear to me that the people who do this stuff just have no experience of what it's like to be a cyclist. They don't realise how fast you're capable of travelling, nor how effective your brakes are (or are not, more to the point). They don't realise how unpleasant it is to have someone squeeze past you. They've no experience of the effort it takes to regain your speed once you've had to brake. And they don't consider what would happen if the cyclist hit a pot hole and fell in front of them at any point.

    I really feel the only way of fixing this going forward is to make cycling proficiency tests a pre-requisite of a driving test, or having those that are unable to cycle do an extended test or training course focussing on cycle safety. You don't need to cycle to stand on the side of the road and have a car come past you 2 feet away at 60mph and see how pleasant it is.

    I also support, wholeheartedly, the idea of retraining or retesting drivers as frequently as possible. I'd happily pay 30 and spend an hour every couple of years to drive on safer roads! Of course, you'll just have a massive increase in illegal drivers on the road then...

    Finally, I just can't understand why the two drivers in the OPs links got off. Both of them were examples of risk-taking behaviour, which I think most motorists are guilty of at one time or another. The first was driving too close, the second driving too fast into the sun. I honestly believe that any driver doing these things weighs up the risk...they think "it will probably be OK to keep driving into the sun...there probably isn't a cyclist there"...and they probably get away with it 99% of the time. But the 1% of the time they actually hit and kill someone, they should man up and admit that they were taking a risk that cost a life - and they should pay for that mistake.
    • antrobus
    • By antrobus 2nd Jul 12, 2:18 PM
    • 16,899 Posts
    • 23,894 Thanks
    antrobus
    yup and it begs the question why.
    The way the trial/evidence was handled or as simple as a common view of it being the cyclists fault...
    Originally posted by custardy
    I don't believe it's really a question of people assuming that it's the 'cyclists fault', but that it's rather a case of 'there but for the grace of God, go I'. From what I understand, juries are notoriously reluctant to convict drivers where the prosecution can't show any obvious wrongdoing - (if you see what I mean) - because they all sit there thinking it could have been me driving that car.
    • antrobus
    • By antrobus 2nd Jul 12, 2:20 PM
    • 16,899 Posts
    • 23,894 Thanks
    antrobus
    ....

    Finally, I just can't understand why the two drivers in the OPs links got off. Both of them were examples of risk-taking behaviour, which I think most motorists are guilty of at one time or another. ....
    Originally posted by Idiophreak
    As I was saying, there but for the grace of God....
    • Idiophreak
    • By Idiophreak 2nd Jul 12, 2:27 PM
    • 11,635 Posts
    • 15,175 Thanks
    Idiophreak
    As I was saying, there but for the grace of God....
    Originally posted by antrobus
    Well, quite...but this shouldn't really factor. The law's quite black and white...something doesn't become less dangerous or careless just because everybody else does it too...
    • antrobus
    • By antrobus 2nd Jul 12, 2:29 PM
    • 16,899 Posts
    • 23,894 Thanks
    antrobus
    Well, quite...but this shouldn't really factor. The law's quite black and white...something doesn't become less dangerous or careless just because everybody else does it too...
    Originally posted by Idiophreak
    The law might appear to be black and white, but it's applied by human beings.
  • Mechan135
    I think driver top up training is a great idea. I am both a driver and avid cyclist and have had some squeaky bum moments on both sides of the wind shield.

    I think a lot of it comes down to road awareness and I am not sure how you are meant to teach people to be more aware when they drive every single day?
    • NBLondon
    • By NBLondon 2nd Jul 12, 4:24 PM
    • 3,276 Posts
    • 16,471 Thanks
    NBLondon
    I find it disappointing that what was a very good point in the initial post viz. those who cause death by careless or dangerous driving may be getting off too lightly - has been partly derailed by the usual "some cyclists are idiots"/"more drivers are idiots" debate.

    Just because a cyclist would probably come off worse in a collision does not mean they couldn't have caused it. Nor that they couldn't cause car A to take avoiding action and hit and injure someone else. zagfles described upthread a cyclist heading across a junction through a red light. I see this almost daily - one morning, I saw 3 in a row do it.

    Every time a stupid cyclist takes a risk like this and ignores the law it makes good drivers assume stupidity and allow for it but makes bad drivers annoyed.

    Every time a "holier than thou" cyclist tries to claim they are justified in breaking the law because there are stupid, careless and dangerous drivers around - it weakens the position for cyclists as a whole.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,330Posts Today

8,626Users online

Martin's Twitter