Accident with cyclist - Seeking advice

[mattyg]

So what he should have done was wait until the bin lorry turns up, empties the bins and the owners of said bins then put them back?
Or the cyclist could have shown some situational awareness.

He should have edged out to the edge of the carriageway WHILST looking in the direction of travel.

He said he could see left properly. That implies he could have seen to the right. So making sure there is a large enough gap he should have edged to the kerb whilst looking left. The OP didn't look in the direction of travel he was still looking right whilst preparing to and moving left. (this is something I'm sure we all do bu this time the gamble didn't pay off) Had he looked left he would have seen the Cyclist. Before moving rather than AFTER the bang.

I used to drive out of an entry that was 1foot wider either side of my vehicle. This entry was between 2 buildings so I had to do what the OP should have done EVERY time I left. Yes I had some near misses but I was always looking where I was going and did so slowly enough.

 

[Dr Who]

There are people even defending the motorist who didn't take any extra care when pulling out.
He admitted that he couldn't see to his left because the bins were in the way so took the chance and lost.
Yes, the cyclist was an idiot but the OP basically risked it and looks like he will come off worse.
Lesson learned for both of them.

There are people here who are saying 100% cyclist fault - I love OCUK.

Yeah including a Police Accident investigator, Traffic Cop and Police Driving Instructor of 30 years... The cyclist was a muppet, breaking the law, took a chance at getting past the car as it pulled out and it bit him in the backside!

 

[Jonny ///M]

So what he should have done was wait until the bin lorry turns up, empties the bins and the owners of said bins then put them back?
Or the cyclist could have shown some situational awareness.

This ^

I'd be late for work if I had to follow OCUK rule book for pulling out my drive with a hedge blocking the view to the left slightly.

I pull forward to the edge, stick the nose out slightly to give anyone coming a second or two to see and react to it then pull out slowly.

If a cyclist wants to see the bonnet of a car and keep passing then that's up to them.

Anything on the road is a bit of give and take and common sense. If the cyclist in the op was a driver he'd be the type to sit on the inside of an HGV on a roundabout.

 

[Dr Who]

This ^

I'd be late for work if I had to follow OCUK rule book for pulling out my drive with a hedge blocking the view to the left slightly.

I pull forward to the edge, stick the nose out slightly to give anyone coming a second or two to see and react to it then pull out slowly.

If a cyclist wants to see the bonnet of a car and keep passing then that's up to them.

Anything on the road is a bit of give and take and common sense. If the cyclist in the op was a driver he'd be the type to sit on the inside of an HGV on a roundabout.

Exactly this, cyclist MUST have seen the car, he was riding illegally, too fast, took a chance and it bit him in the backside.

I used to cycle every day in the rush hour for 5 years and never came close to having an accident because I acted for my own safety.

 

[FrenchTart]

I'm a cyclist and whilst I thought it odd that the driver didn't react a little quicker I have zero sympathy for the cyclist in the video. As has been stated, he was riding on the pavement at speed and as it was against the flow of traffic I can understand how the motorist would be paying more attention to the right rather than left.

 

[mattyg]

I'm a cyclist and whilst I thought it odd that the driver didn't react a little quicker I have zero sympathy for the cyclist in the video. As has been stated, he was riding on the pavement at speed and as it was against the flow of traffic I can understand how the motorist would be paying more attention to the right rather than left.

This is exactly it.

However what would peoples opinion be if the OP had pulled out on a HGV coming from the left that was straggling both lanes due to parked cars

 

[Orionaut]

This is exactly it.

However what would peoples opinion be if the OP had pulled out on a HGV coming from the left that was straggling both lanes due to parked cars

But that would be on the road, not the pavement, which would be a slightly different scenario. Once the driver has established that it is clear right, I would expect him to look ahead. Also, I would expect that any vehicle driving on the wrong side of the road to pass parked cars to show due care when approaching somebody who is clearly attempting to pull out into the road and drive accordingly.

 

[mattyg]

But that would be on the road, not the pavement, which would be a slightly different scenario. Once the driver has established that it is clear right, I would expect him to look ahead. Also, I would expect that any vehicle driving on the wrong side of the road to pass parked cars to show due care when approaching somebody who is clearly attempting to pull out into the road and drive accordingly.

So once the OP had established that it was clear to the right you too would have expected him to look ahead.. Would that be before or after he had started to move?

 

[Orionaut]

So once the OP had established that it was clear to the right you too would have expected him to look ahead.. Would that be before or after he had started to move?

In the example of the OP, he had to move before he could have a clear view left.

Which is why traffic approaching from the left in this situation should assume that emerging traffic like this will not have seen them until the emerging traffics drivers face becomes visible.

Which is why traffic approaching from the left (Whether it be pedestrians,/illegal cyclists on the pavement or overtaking cars/lorries on the highway) has a duty to exercise due care when they can see traffic attempting to emerge from a position which clearly has restricted visibility.

The Law may asign priotity rules to cover situations like this. But the onus of care for avoiding accidents still (At least in my view anyway) lies mainly with the person with the best view...

 

[mattyg]

In the example of the OP, he had to move before he could have a clear view left.

Snip

But the OP didn't look left until he heard the bang.

In that situation the OP should have been looking left and creeping until he reached the kerb, Blocking the pavement. Then he can look right for a suitable gap and then Look in the direction he wants to travel. Then he could proceed.

I've said it before. We all do what the OP did. It's just this time he was unlucky. Same as roundabouts everyone looks right, gap, go...Bang. Car in front stopped or traffic on roundabout stopped.

All this aside it'll be very interesting to see what the outcome is. Whether we all have to be careful or we have carte blanche to drive into cyclist illegally riding on pavements.






That last bit was tongue in cheek

 

[Dr Who]

Creep and Peep

It is what you teach drivers when pulling out at a difficult junction, he moved forward a foot and looked... EXACTLY what drivers are taught.

 

[mattyg]

Creep and Peep

It is what you teach drivers when pulling out at a difficult junction, he moved forward a foot and looked... EXACTLY what drivers are taught.

Are they not taught to look where they are going first.

If the OP had done creep and peep he would have been looking where he was going and would have seen the cyclist.

He should have looked and then moved forward. Not move forward then look.

 

[adolf hamster]

Are they not taught to look where they are going first.

If the OP had done creep and peep he would have been looking where he was going and would have seen the cyclist.

He should have looked and then moved forward. Not move forward then look.

so what should the cyclist have done when he saw the op? because pretty sure "barrel on and just assume the car wont move" is the strategy that led to him getting knocked off.

 

[mattyg]

so what should the cyclist have done when he saw the op? because pretty sure "barrel on and just assume the car wont move" is the strategy that led to him getting knocked off.

Yep absolutely it was a factor and quite possibly the largest factor. But the OP isn't blameless. Not having a go at the OP the Cyclist was a Pratt.

We have to watch out for other stupid road users. So we can avoid accidents. You tube is full of people swerving out of the way of oncoming idiots etc.

Had the OP looked left BEFORE moving he would have seen the cyclist.


If the cyclist hadn't been on the pavement AND the OP had looked where he was going the accident could have been avoided.

If the cyclist had been on the road as he should have been then the OP not looking where he was going wouldn't have been an issue.

 

[Daaaavvveee]

Yep absolutely it was a factor and quite possibly the largest factor. But the OP isn't blameless. Not having a go at the OP the Cyclist was a Pratt.

We have to watch out for other stupid road users. So we can avoid accidents. You tube is full of people swerving out of the way of oncoming idiots etc.

Had the OP looked left BEFORE moving he would have seen the cyclist.


If the cyclist hadn't been on the pavement AND the OP had looked where he was going the accident could have been avoided.

If the cyclist had been on the road as he should have been then the OP not looking where he was going wouldn't have been an issue.

I thought the fact the camera was higher up it makes it appear the motorist would have seen him.
In reality he had to creep up to see left, but you don't expect an idiot to be riding at speed on the pavement.

 

[adolf hamster]

Fair enough, i get your point, but at least your acknowledging in this case it was the cyclist who had the greater opportunity to amend the situation.

 

[FrenchTart]

Fair enough, i get your point, but at least your acknowledging in this case it was the cyclist who had the greater opportunity to amend the situation.

I think most cyclists that have posted in the thread have said the cyclist was primarily at fault

 

[mattyg]

I thought the fact the camera was higher up it makes it appear the motorist would have seen him.
In reality he had to creep up to see left, but you don't expect an idiot to be riding at speed on the pavement.

Fair enough, i get your point, but at least your acknowledging in this case it was the cyclist who had the greater opportunity to amend the situation.

The camera is higher up. But its also on the left so the angle of view is tighter. The OP being further to the right means his viewing angle was more open. That and the FOV of the camera is way less than our FOV.

None of that makes a difference though as the OP was looking in the opposite direction when he stated to move

 

[jpaul]

Are there any radar options, that would help this situation ? (or the more common emerging and failing to spot motor-bike scenario)

The static picture at the start had shown FOV OP would have seen, but there was still little additional visibility above the bin, but neither cyclist had fluo clothing, nor was car a bright colour. (I forget which car colours attract higher premiums?)

it was the cyclist who had the greater opportunity to amend the situation.

but, still the question on the lesson to learn, and, how the risk could have been reduced by earlier action/different-strategy from the OP

He should have edged out to the edge of the carriageway WHILST looking in the direction of travel.

breaking manouver into two, still seems best option, bonnet is quite long, so, maybe that hinders this option.

 

[Nasher]

Or maybe hire a butler to wave you out.