Cyclist plague spreading

Captain · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:12

Diagro said:
The tosspot overtook him and cut in front and stopped abruptly to use a cash point.. Drivers fault there.
The driver admitted to not seeing him.... This was not the chap on his bikes fault.

No insureance? I have insurance on my bike which will be much the same as a cars if I hit one...
Also he had concussion for 3 days, so not exactly no injury

Eh?

physichull · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:15

Saundie said:
On the plus side, as the cost of motoring continues to rise we'll see an increase in the number of cyclists on the road. Eventually we'll reach the tipping point where cyclists outnumber motorists, and then on to the inevitable time where the motoring plague is finally eradicated. It shall be a joyful day for all concerned.

Such a good post, shame it shall never be reality!

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:17

Nexus said:
No, 'Ride' Membership level makes up the largest number of memberships which does give liability cover. It's specifically aimed and marketed at commuters and general riders as well.

Bronze is actually the lowest subscribed level because the fact is that the Race level memberships really only have two reasons going for them as to why you would choose it over 'Ride' membership. Those are that you get a racing licence, and if you have gold membership, you get a significant discount on bike property and racing insurance. Bronze is largely useless because you can't get a full racing licence with it.

Nonetheless, even if the entire membership has third party insurance, that only makes up a fraction of the people using a cycle on the roads of the UK...so I say again, that I doubt the majority of cyclist have such insurance as you claim they have.

Nexus said:
That may well be the case, but as somebody has already pointed out in the thread, as much as some Motorists seem to paint Cyclists as doing nothing but going around damaging things, the reality is that the bike always comes off worse in any accident, whether with a car, or static object belonging to the council. If this was something that was happening regularly and was really a big issue, mandatory insurance would be required, yet it isn't.

You are arguing to the wrong person here, I do not ascribe to the position that all cyclists are nutters any more than all car drivers are...I am both and am fully aware of the loons on both sides, and that the vast majority are perfectly safe and aware of the inherent risks and account for them.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:22

Fuzz said:
So are you saying a cyclist should brake every time a car over takes them in case they get left hooked?

Normally cyclists get left hooked at road junctions, not some random spot on the road that happens to have a cash point near it.

It would be no different to me overtaking you in my car and slamming the anchors on because I wanted to turn into a driveway.
You wouldn't have anticipated the retardedness of that action and you wouldn't slow down in any anticipation of "going into the back of someone" that is currently ACCELERATING past you..

Of course you have a responsibility to be aware of dangers while out on the bike but avoiding such ******** can be somewhat more difficult.

I am saying that everyone should anticipate the road ahead, especially when in a situation which has increased risk, such as a cyclist being overtaken by a larger vehicle. If braking is necessary then do it, if not then don't.

If I was being overtaken by a car that then broke and turned into a drive then I would be at a safe distance from the car so I can stop, the car still has to pull into the lane in front after he has overtaken before he can turn into a drive at which point I would already be at a safe distance in order to stop before I hit him...if he turns into the drive before completing the overtaking manoeuvre then he hits me, not the other way around.

Anyway this is going around in circles, ultimately I feel that the car driver was an idiot and driving without due care, and the cyclist was not as aware as he should have been, therefore they each have some responsibility for the incident. I am sure some people will disagree, but that is my opinion given what we know.

SexyGreyFox · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:29

Castiel said:
You have said yourself that Drivers "left hooking" is common, so surely you should be doubly aware of the possibility when being overtaken and ride accordingly.

So every time I see a street coming up on the left I've got to slow down from 25mph down to ?mph?
I wouldn't get anywhere if I had to do that every time a car came past me and a turning was coming up on the left.

Like I said earlier, my attitude now is that every driver is out to get me and I don't have any rights on the road. I have also slowed down quite a lot since my last major accident.
I was riding on hospital grounds, a taxi pulled out on me, I hit just behind the drivers rear door, I fell to the ground and he just drove off.
Many witnesses, Police traced the car but it could have been any one of Asian taxi drivers who answered.
Since I wasn't hurt or my bike wasn't damaged I was told to forget it.

Fuzz said:
It would be no different to me overtaking you in my car and slamming the anchors on because I wanted to turn into a driveway.

This happened to me earlier this year, car overtook me on my bike then left hooked me to get up his drive and I just missed him (notice how I said 'I just missed him'?).
I stopped at the end of his gates and he wouldn't get out, when he eventually did he claimed that he didn't think he was that close and then he did the ultimate no no, he actually said I shouldn't be on the road because I don't pay road tax.
He had both barrels there and then

[DOD]Asprilla · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:30

Castiel said:
If I was being overtaken by a car that then broke and turned into a drive then I would be at a safe distance from the car so I can stop, the car still has to pull into the lane in front after he has overtaken before he can turn into a drive at which point I would already be at a safe distance in order to stop before I hit him...if he turns into the drive before completing the overtaking manoeuvre then he hits me, not the other way around.

You have no idea whether you would or wouldn't. It depends how close the driver is to you when he pulls in and how quickly he stops. The argument you are so sure about depends on an assumed scenario.

Also, I'd check your h&c insurance because mine with eSure, my previous with RSA, and LVE before that all covered me for personal liability for cycling. Not as a special request, but as standard. As I mentioned, the personal liability insurance I get with my Lloyds bank account also covers me. More cyclists are insured thn you think.

SexyGreyFox · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:32

Castiel said:
If I was being overtaken by a car that then broke and turned into a drive then I would be at a safe distance from the car so I can stop, the car still has to pull into the lane in front after he has overtaken before he can turn into a drive at which point I would already be at a safe distance in order to stop before I hit him...if he turns into the drive before completing the overtaking manoeuvre then he hits me, not the other way around.

You are talking complete and utter BS.
Please Castiel, just stop, you are making a fool of yourself.

hurfdurf · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:33

Castiel said:
I'm not actually saying that, so your post is pretty redundant.

It kinda seems like you are dude.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:33

Dimple said:
You are talking complete and utter BS.
Please Castiel, just stop, you are making a fool of yourself.

No I am not, just because it doesn't agree with your bias, doesn't make it BS.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:34

hurfdurf said:
It kinda seems like you are dude.

Then you need to read everything I have said, rather than selecting what you want to read and interpreting it as you want it to sound.

SexyGreyFox · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:42

Castiel said:
No I am not, just because it doesn't agree with your bias, doesn't make it BS.

You must cycle in an area where you see 1 car come past a day so that you can gracefully slow down and be prepared for the left hook and then carry on your merry way in your fantasy land.
I on the other hand live in the City of Stoke where I have 100s maybe 1000s of vehicles coming past me and I can't slow down every time one is coming past me.
I wish I was you.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:42

[DOD]Asprilla;24940044 said:
You have no idea whether you would or wouldn't. It depends how close the driver is to you when he pulls in and how quickly he stops. The argument you are so sure about depends on an assumed scenario.

You are wrong, I would, because I would be aware and watching the car as he overtakes and I would be slowing down accordingly so to maintain a safe distance before he pulls in..if he pulls in before he has overtaken me, then he hits me...not me him...which is entirely different from he scenario people are describing here.

[DOD]Asprilla;24940044 said:
Also, I'd check your h&c insurance because mine with eSure, my previous with RSA, and LVE before that all covered me for personal liability for cycling. Not as a special request, but as standard. As I mentioned, the personal liability insurance I get with my Lloyds bank account also covers me. More cyclists are insured thn you think.

I did look into this and most only offer cover for theft as a default unless you specify cover for a bike...you probably specified cycle cover on your insurance when you took it out, the indemnity may be standard with the additional cycle cover, but it is rarely so with bog standard household cover. I think the AA automatically cover cycles for theft and third party, but not all do.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:46

Dimple said:
You must cycle in an area where you see 1 car come past a day so that you can gracefully slow down and be prepared for the left hook and then carry on your merry way in your fantasy land.
I on the other hand live in the City of Stoke where I have 100s maybe 1000s of vehicles coming past me and I can't slow down every time one is coming past me.
I wish I was you.

I have cycled in London after getting off the train on average 3 times a week for the past couple of years. I have yet to hit a car which has cut me up, which they often do. I have always been able to stop in time, mainly because I learnt that lesson the first couple of times.

I didn't say gracefully slow down either, quit putting word in my mouth..often I have come to a screeching halt because of some nobber, but I still stop in time...riding straight into a stationary vehicle is just stupid, even if it has just stopped.

In any case it may have escaped everyone attention, but the incident in the OP was NOT a left hooker...but simply a car stopping suddenly on the side of the road....there is no mention of the cyclist being overtaken at all.

PapaLazaru · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:50

I cycle to work daily, apart from when it is peeing it down and then I drive. Fact is that there are a lot of angry late for school / work drivers that somehow view me, when I am cycling along, as part of the reason they are late.

Cycled home earlier and a van overtook me in slow traffic and pulled to the left when they had just to cut me up and force me to slow down.

[DOD]Asprilla · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:51

Castiel said:
You are wrong, I would, because I would be aware and watching the car as he overtakes and I would be slowing down accordingly so to maintain a safe distance before he pulls in..if he pulls in before he has overtaken me, then he hits me...not me him...which is entirely different from he scenario people are describing here.

So you would slow down for every car that goes past? Which means in traffic you'd be stationary until the road cleared? Somehow I think not.

Also, at what point do you start slowing? When his rear wheel is level with you, or do you wait until there is daylight between you and back of his car. Or do you slow as they are passing you?

The original scenario in the OP doesn't state any distances or how / when the driver moved left so I'll repeat that you don't know if the cyclist was in any way responsible or not. You are making it up.

Castiel said:
I did look into this and most only offer cover for theft as a default unless you specify cover for a bike...you probably specified cycle cover on your insurance when you took it out, the indemnity may be standard with the additional cycle cover, but it is rarely so with bog standard household cover. I think the AA automatically cover cycles for theft and third party, but not all do.

I didn't. In most cases my bikes are covered separately as theft insurance typically only goes up to £1,000.

SexyGreyFox · 13 Sep 2013 at 20:54

Castiel said:
.riding straight into a stationary vehicle is just stupid, even if it has just stopped.

Left hooking means the driver will still be moving but has turned left up a street immediately in front of you.
I agree, if a driver comes past and has been able to come to a stop at the side of the road then 'on paper' it does seem ridiculous that you would cycle into it.

[DOD]Asprilla · 13 Sep 2013 at 21:02

Castiel said:
I have cycled in London after getting off the train on average 3 times a week for the past couple of years. I have yet to hit a car which has cut me up, which they often do. I have always been able to stop in time, mainly because I learnt that lesson the first couple of times

I don't doubt that for a moment, but you have no idea what happened in the OP, the distances and relative speeds involved.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 21:03

[DOD]Asprilla;24940161 said:
So you would slow down for every car that goes past? Which means in traffic you'd be stationary until the road cleared? Somehow I think not.

I don't see how a car would overtake me in heavy traffic in the first place..where would he go?

[DOD]Asprilla;24940161 said:
Also, at what point do you start slowing? When his rear wheel is level with you, or do you wait until there is daylight between you and back of his car. Or do you slow as they are passing you?

I slow when they pull out to overtake, when they complete their overtaking and the distance is safe I increase speed accordingly.

[DOD]Asprilla;24940161 said:
The original scenario in the OP doesn't state any distances or how / when the driver moved left so I'll repeat that you don't know if the cyclist was in any way responsible or not. You are making it up.

The original piece states that the Car pulled away and then stopped sharply in front of him, there is not mention of overtaking at all, or implication of such..the cyclist then stated that he rode directly into the rear of the vehicle. I am going by what he said, I am not making anything up....If the facts are different then my opinon would be accordingly different, but at the moment, given the assumption you have to make due to a lack of information I would maintain that if the car was pulling away from he cyclist to begin with and then broke sharply, there should be at least some time for the cyclist to react. Unless the cyclist was riding at speed and was unable to stop, in which case the personal responsibility still applies as he should maintain a safe distance.

Castiel · 13 Sep 2013 at 21:04

[DOD]Asprilla;24940209 said:
I don't doubt that for a moment, but you have no idea what happened in the OP, the distances and relative speeds involved.

No one does, which is why I have always said..."given what we know" rather than being definitive about it.

Tefal · 13 Sep 2013 at 21:07

Castiel said:
I don't see how a car would overtake me in heavy traffic in the first place..where would he go?

dual lanes?

he might pull in on you.