Cyclist plague spreading

I would slow down and anticipate your actions by maintaining a stopping distance and suitable speed between me and the vehicle in front, including while it is overtaking, the driver, if trying to force an accident, would have to actually hit me rather than I hit him. As the Highway Code you quote says, slow down if necessary to allow the vehicle to pass. I am aware of the fact that the car overtaking may well suddenly stop or cut me up, so I take appropriate measures to avoid such.
 
Castiel said:
I would slow down and anticipate your actions by maintaining a stopping distance and suitable speed between me and the vehicle in front, including while it is overtaking, the driver, if trying to force an accident, would have to actually hit me rather than I hit him. As the Highway Code you quote says, slow down if necessary to allow the vehicle to pass. I am aware of the fact that the car overtaking may well suddenly stop or cut me up, so I take appropriate measures to avoid such.
Click to expand...

Which sounds like a perfectly reasonable and safe approach to take, but you can't say that doing this will ensure you never go into the back of the overtaking car. It appeared above as if you are trying to say that it will ALWAYS be the persons behind fault no matter the circumstances. During the overtake there will become a point where they are mere inches in front of you (whether on your side of the road or the other) and if they're car can stop in a shorter distance than yours then you are going to hit them.

But then some people are idiots who want to try and cause accidents, of course your approach would be appropriate in 99% of circumstances and if people were decent enough to not commit fraud it wouldn't be an issue.

I think cyclists sometimes don't realise how small they are compared to a car and therefore how easy it would be to be in a blind spot. It is possible he was cycling along next to the car near its back door thinking he was visible, when he likely wasn't and the drivers excuse of 'oh sorry I didn't see you' could have been very genuine.

It isn't just about trying to predict what others are going to do, but making sure you are in a position to be seen on the road as well as avoid issues as far as possible.

edit: had originally read the article as the audi pulling in while overtaking, which would be a hard thing to try and prevent - but it appears more like the cyclist was just following when he accelerated and then pulled over. Hard to say one way or the other tbh without all the facts but with more information it could easily be either party at fault.

The 2 scenarios I can see are:
1. Cyclist is following audi, audi accelerates and then pulls over. Cyclist does not expect this and does not stop in time. Cyclist is at fault even though audi behaviour may have been irregular or even dangerous.
2. Audi driver overtook cyclist, then broke suddenly in front of or alongside the cyclist and hit him in the process. Driver is at fault for driving into the cyclist rather than getting hit by.

Not that fault is the objective of the campaign, it is the fact the driver committed the offence of leaving the scene of an accident without giving details as has been said above.
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
No they are not. They are simply not ascribing the accident as being entirely the drivers fault. It is not illegal to overtake a cyclist or to brake suddenly....the cyclist should have been paying more attention to what the vehicles in front of him were doing, this includes anticipating the road ahead and slowing or stopping if necessary...he clearly did not do this and ran into a stationary vehicle. Next time he might think to slow down on such a dangerous road for cyclists (as he made a point of stating) so that he could stop even if a car stops suddenly and unexpectedly in front of him in future. This doesn't mean that the driver has no fault, only that the Cyclist also has a responsibility to his own safety, which he has not followed.
Click to expand...

Uhuh.

I've had one incident of a car overtaking my bike at significant speed then not stopping but braking hard and pulling a left turn into a side road immediately after. No signals.

Because I was doing ~20+ this resulted in me locking my wheels and skidding with my rear wheel attempting to go to the side to barely miss his rear passenger door as he swung across.

If I had taken a fraction of a second longer to realise what douchebaggery he was up to when his brake lights went on I'd have hit him and yet you seem to be implying a collision would be partially my fault for not anticipating his manoeuvre.

Rather than in my eyes entirely his fault for an unnecessary overtaking move and then causing severe inconvenience as he rapidly cut his speed and pulled across my path.



The story in the rag does appear to be different in that it's merely braking not braking after overtaking as seems to be getting mentioned and that would be a fault of the person behind for not keeping distance.
 
It also specifically says in the highway code if you are approaching a roundabout or a junction and turning left that you should NOT overtake a cyclist, but wait behind and then make the turn after the cyclist has passed.
 
It would have been partially your fault, just because he is an inconsiderate and poor driver doesn't mean you escape responsibilty for ensuring you are at a safe distance from the vehicle at all times, even if it means stopping as he overtakes if you think he is too close or as you put it, doing an unecessary overtaking move....

As a cyclist myself I have often had similar problems from inconsiderate drivers, which is why I anticipate the worse especially if someone overtakes near to a junction or interchange. I will slow right down or even stop if I think they might cut me up or there is a risk of accident.
 
Phantom Shadow said:
It also specifically says in the highway code if you are approaching a roundabout or a junction and turning left that you should NOT overtake a cyclist, but wait behind and then make the turn after the cyclist has passed.
Click to expand...

Indeed, however just because another road user fails to heed the Highway Code or do something stupid, doesn't excuse your own responsibility in ensuring a safe distance from a vehicle in front.

Sometimes accidents happen, but they are invariably avoidable, if not always actually avoided.
 
Just because you may have been able to avoid the accident does not make the accident your fault. I can see where you are coming from, in that if you could have avoided the accident then you should have. But usually when people discuss fault in accidents they discuss who the police/insurance would place the blame on.

If a driver overtakes to then right hook a cyclist by turning left that is the drivers fault as far as the law is concerned.

At least you appear to be very aware of your surroundings when on the bike and are very active in ensuring your safety. Unfortunately the same can't be said about all cyclists.
 
Everybody else on the road is an idiot except me, its a good attitude to have when driving.
 
When a maneuver of any kind on the road is taken, it must be done in such a way that does not hinder anyone else.

This especially applies making someone brake.

It extra-especially includes doing something that leaves a third party no chance of even breaking and simply ploughing into you.

If someone pulls in front of you leaving you no time to meaningfully react, it really is not your fault.
 
Pretty sure that if anything the phrase "due care and attention" could be used here, the excuse that I've seen some people use that the driver did not need to be aware of the cyclist after he overtook him, is a complete crock, not being aware of everything around you while you are driving a near two tonne metal box of fire spewing mechanised death is no excuse.. Or does that mean that, on a similar scale, a truck driver can sweep across the road and push other cars off the road simply because they are bigger?

I am sure that there is fault on both sides, however, its been badly handled by the driver of the car, and is likely to end up costing them more in the long run.
 
When I came home ****ed the other night and walked into my neighbours car while texting on my phone, I didn't blame my neighbour for parking it there, I blamed the barman for getting me so drunk.
 
im slightly confused by the OP opening statement of a cycling plague yet the article is about a cyclist being dismounted forcibly by a car.

got to love the rose tinted glasses of "oh, should've maintained a stopping distance". what the hell? do you have a crystal ball to know the car isnt going to slam their brakes on just after passing you? stopping distances arent going to help you on that one.
 
I suspect that such insurance is not the norm. Most insurance for cyclists only covers the actual cyclist and their bike, not third parties.
Click to expand...
a lot of people likely have british cycling memberships
£2 a month http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/membership/article/ride-membership
Up to £10m third party liability insurance
Click to expand...
most people will be members just for the halfords and wiggle discounts

the halfords one is pretty generous
Members of British Cycling can save 10% off everything at Halfords (excluding gift vouchers) to spend on any products in store, including sale items.
Click to expand...
 
altus said:
There`s the problem, there are a lot of people riding bikes that have no road awareness, time for cycling test`s and 3rd party insurance surely.
Click to expand...

As i cyclist, I am for this. Not necessarily a test, but some kind of valid CBT like we have for mopeds, compulsory helmets and 3rd party insurance.

I did collide into a parked car a few years ago. I fully accepted liability and proceeding where amicable. I actually claimed on my Personal Household insurance under public liability. It might be worth checking your policy if you have this if you're a homeowner and a cyclist.
 
Nerusy said:
I can't quite wrap my head around how the cyclist got into this situation, he couldn't have been travelling so fast that he could not break in time.
Click to expand...

do you ride? he was probably going around 20mph and bikes don't stop as fast as cars can
but we can't know what happened.

did the driver fly past really fast to overtake and then instantly slam his breaks on giving the cyclist no room to slow down or get out of the way?

or something else like the cyclist trying to get a bit of a toe and didn't let the car build a gap.

so far whenever anyway has passed me they haven't tried to immediately pull back into the lane though they have always gave me loads of space infront
 
Castiel said:
The cyclist should still have stopped, a cyclist is as responsible for anticipating other road users (and their idiocy) just as much as anyone else...he hit a stationary car, the car did not hit him.
Click to expand...

This is the first time I've posted this but Castiel you are talking crap.
Come and commute 1 day in my cleats and see the problems I have to face daily here in Stoke.
At least once a week some idiot will left hook me, this means a driver puts his foot down to get past and then immediately turns left - and no, my experience hasn't stopped me from hitting them.
Perhaps you would now say that since the driver didn't hit me then he must have judged it right?
After 1 year of commuting I have now had to change my attitude when I cycle and the simple rule I go by is 'I don't belong on the road'.
If I see a motorist at the junction of a side street (left or right) I now make the presumption it is their right to pull straight out on me even if I'm doing 30 mph.
if I see a motorist turning right in front of me it is their right of way and I'm expected to slow down if they just go.
It's an awful attitude to have but it's keeping me safe knowing I have no rights as a cyclist.
HOWEVER, no amount of experience can ever make me judge a car that speeds past me and suddenly turns in on me, if I stop/start for every car that speeds past me I won't get very far.

And OP, I agree that weekend cyclists may be a fad but some of us do it daily to commute to work.
Mame will back me up when I say that parking at the place I work is next to impossible and even if I could I am around 15 minutes quicker on my bike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom