Completely this. Assuming you had pulled out, it would be one of those situations where you can aportion varying degrees of blame to all involved, because all bare some responsibility for the incident.
Almost hit a cyclist
- Thread starter Nick1881
- Start date
Completely this. Assuming you had pulled out, it would be one of those situations where you can aportion varying degrees of blame to all involved, because all bare some responsibility for the incident.
That's hardly a near miss, I've had far worse as a cyclist, once was cycling around 25mph, following all road rules, in right lane etc, then had an idiot literally just pull up infront of me 5 meters away so he could get into a parking spot, at that speed & distance the brakes on bike are useless, not enough grip, fortunately there was no car on opposite direction so managed to swerve other I would have smashed into him & gone over.
Similar thing today, cycling along, much slower 5 mph on a small side road, then a delivery van pulls onto the road wrong side of the road to park up, wasn't even stopping despite seeing me, had to swerve out of the way.
Bloody drivers, get off the road if you can't drive or follow highway code.
Similar thing today, cycling along, much slower 5 mph on a small side road, then a delivery van pulls onto the road wrong side of the road to park up, wasn't even stopping despite seeing me, had to swerve out of the way.
Bloody drivers, get off the road if you can't drive or follow highway code.
Well, except the one about maintaining a sufficient distance between your self and the vehicle in front such that, should they have to perform an emergency stop, you can stop safely.
Sounds like you need to sort out your bicycle brakes. I slammed on after a car halted in front of me the other day and stopped from 30mph in no more than 5 metres on a damp road. Yes, there was a little bit of rear wheel lift but mostly under control
lol
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 3,739
- Location
- Delete *.*
This. Those clowns shouldnt have been on that side of the road. If they followed the rules of the road there would be no issue.
It has genuinely astonished me how this seems to be being ignored by some people who seek to pick holes with a driver who frankly seems to have done nothing wrong. The bikes were driving the wrong way down the road, the end.
As per shauncr91's post, if there had been a parked car on the opposite side and a car coming from the left passing it, they would also have quite rightly been on the "wrong side of the road".
HOWEVER, in this situation, I agree, the driver did nothing wrong, and stopped at the junction, the cyclists were idiots for cutting the corner round the van like they did, but a vehicle being on the "wrong side of the road" doesn't give you free reign to drive into them "because right of way"
Wrong.
You MUST give way to traffic on the main road, it doesn't matter which direction it's coming from.
Correct. This is why you can't just pull out when someone's performing an overtake.
Hmn,
The Van is clearly from a delivery company, The parking is inconvenient perhaps, but I would be surprised had he not been gone again within a couple of minutes (You can see the driver in the yellow jacket searching for his delivery address. Perhaps his next leg involved turning right out of Nick's road so he didn't want to go left and then have to turn around)
There is no evidence that the Cyclists had been pavement riding. Rather I suspect that they shifted over to the "Wrong" side of the road preparatory to turning into the road that Nick was turning out of in order not to have to wait in the middle of the road for the Truck (seen later after Nick had pulled out) to pass.
There do not appear to be any road markings, so I really do not know what the "Give Way" position might be (Any barrack room Lawyers here??)
I do not think that Nick approached the junction at excessive speed under the limited visibility circumstances. The Cyclists OTOH were carrying out an "Unusual" manoeuvre and were clearly intending to cut the turn while failing to allow for the possibility of emerging traffic .
Had Nick been travelling faster and hit the Cyclists, I would consider him partially at fault. Had the Cyclists cut the corner more aggressively and hit Nick. I would consider them at fault.
But, as I have said before, I consider all accidents to be 50/50 unless you can put a very good case for them not being so.
As it happens, no accident occurred. So nobody was to blame, And that is how things should be.
It's a T-junction. The stem gives way to the bar.
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,707
- Location
- Buckingamshire
They were at fault IMHO. Reckless riding TBH.
Is that actually the "Law"? (I really do not know)
One might also argue that an unmarked junction should be treated as a mini roundabout (Priority to the right)
But, as I say, I do not know what the Law actually is.
Go and watch the video
Where did he stop? Yes thats right, still on the road he was on.
He had not encroached the main road, the cyclists came down the wrong side AND turned into the road he was exiting on the wrong side, trying to be on his side.
To my point, The bikes were wrong, everything else is shoulda woulda coulda crap that bares no resemblance to the video. Give way is not Stop, it is give way. He did that. How the hell do you miss that?
I am VERY clear on the give way rule, that is not the issue here.
Look at where the transit appears from, if he had not given way he would have lost his bonnet.
Last edited:
In which case why misquote it?
I already agreed with you that the cyclists were in the wrong in this particular scenario, however your posts give the impression that you think someone being on the wrong side of the road immediately makes everything their fault when that couldn't be further from the truth