Who has right of way?

[totallyfixed]

I start a lot of these traffic answers by saying "I am not a traffic officer, it's not my speciality, I stand to be corrected".

That said... The road is hedgerow to hedgerow. Not curb to curb. So traffic travelling along the main road has priority over those who wish to turn off it into a minor road, or come out from that minor road.

If you are cycling legally on a cycle path then you should under that frame of reference have priority - however the number of drivers who would realise, accept or acknowledge this is likely to be very low.

The issue would be further complicated by the cycle paths that have those "give way" markings before every junction. Logic (which doesn't always necessarily apply well to the costs) would suggest these give way markings mean two things :

1. Clearly my earlier assumption of priority is true - otherwise why would these markings be needed at all?
2. When they exist, the cyclist no longer has priority and should give way.

I would imagine if taken to the nth degree or would need some sort of stated case to give a definitive answer, and it's one we are unlikely to get.

Personally... I would use the road precisely because I don't wish to keep stopping and giving way, because regardless of whether I 'need' to our not, I would give way at these junctions for my own safety.

That's my take on it anyway.

Thanks, I think this illustrates what a mess these junctions are, further I suspect should an incident go to court it would entirely depend on how the judge saw it. I like your logic though regarding cycle paths that have give way signs on them, thereby implying those without support the cyclist having priority.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

It's a mess and given the increase in cycling, no wonder beginners are intimidated, a classic case of I am bigger than you, I am in a car therefore more important. This is what I am talking about, close to where I live. The markings on the cycle path at the junction are bikes.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.6...lDEm9_2p9W99Fc-oWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Looks like a very dangerous junction for a cyclist, needs some crossing lights, maybe further up round the corner.
For some reason when I clicked on the image it took me to a snap shot of February 2009, the path was snowed under, while the road was cleared.

 

[mjr]

Personally... I would use the road precisely because I don't wish to keep stopping and giving way, because regardless of whether I 'need' to our not, I would give way at these junctions for my own safety.

This is another one of those reasons given for ignoring paths which doesn't stack up IMO because if a nobber motorist starts to turn across me, I'm probably going to give way even if I'm on the carriageway, for self-preservation reasons like @Drago.

Looks like a very dangerous junction for a cyclist, needs some crossing lights, maybe further up round the corner.

+1 That's exactly the Richmond-style lethal layout which should be prevented by government. It has no place on safe roads.

 

[Dan B]

This is another one of those reasons given for ignoring paths which doesn't stack up IMO because if a nobber motorist starts to turn across me, I'm probably going to give way even if I'm on the carriageway, for self-preservation reasons like @Drago.

My (anecdotal, unscientific) experience is that motorists are somewhat less likely to turn across me if i am in the same lane as they are to start with, and more likely if I am somewhere off to the left on what they perceive to be a pavement. So, in that situation I'd do the same as you for the same reason, but the situation is less likely to arise

 

[CopperCyclist]

This is another one of those reasons given for ignoring paths which doesn't stack up IMO because if a nobber motorist starts to turn across me, I'm probably going to give way even if I'm on the carriageway, for self-preservation reasons like @Drago.

As would I. The difference is (for me) on the cycle path I'd stop and give way every time - I. E. If a car is sat indicating, I'm stopping to let them go, as I assume they would expect me to give way to them. On the road, I'd carry on and only stop in an emergency situation as I would presume they will give way to me. Hence, I would rather use the road where I am more comfortable in safely using my priority.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

I start a lot of these traffic answers by saying "I am not a traffic officer, it's not my speciality, I stand to be corrected".

That said... The road is hedgerow to hedgerow. Not curb to curb. So traffic travelling along the main road has priority over those who wish to turn off it into a minor road, or come out from that minor road.

If you are cycling legally on a cycle path then you should under that frame of reference have priority - however the number of drivers who would realise, accept or acknowledge this is likely to be very low.

The issue would be further complicated by the cycle paths that have those "give way" markings before every junction. Logic (which doesn't always necessarily apply well to the costs) would suggest these give way markings mean two things :

1. Clearly my earlier assumption of priority is true - otherwise why would these markings be needed at all?
2. When they exist, the cyclist no longer has priority and should give way.

I would imagine if taken to the nth degree or would need some sort of stated case to give a definitive answer, and it's one we are unlikely to get.

Personally... I would use the road precisely because I don't wish to keep stopping and giving way, because regardless of whether I 'need' to our not, I would give way at these junctions for my own safety.

That's my take on it anyway.

Excellent answer. I've always had a problem with the corresponding laws in Australia, because they're every bit as murky as yours. I just spent a few minutes reading (for the nth time) the relevant Australian road rules about giving way to users of foot/shared paths when turning off a road, and I wish I could say they were unambiguous and unarguable, but unfortunately they're not.

 

[Vikeonabike]

I start a lot of these traffic answers by saying "I am not a traffic officer, it's not my speciality, I stand to be corrected".

That said... The road is hedgerow to hedgerow. Not curb to curb. So traffic travelling along the main road has priority over those who wish to turn off it into a minor road, or come out from that minor road.

If you are cycling legally on a cycle path then you should under that frame of reference have priority - however the number of drivers who would realise, accept or acknowledge this is likely to be very low.

The issue would be further complicated by the cycle paths that have those "give way" markings before every junction. Logic (which doesn't always necessarily apply well to the costs) would suggest these give way markings mean two things :

1. Clearly my earlier assumption of priority is true - otherwise why would these markings be needed at all?
2. When they exist, the cyclist no longer has priority and should give way.

I would imagine if taken to the nth degree or would need some sort of stated case to give a definitive answer, and it's one we are unlikely to get.

Personally... I would use the road precisely because I don't wish to keep stopping and giving way, because regardless of whether I 'need' to our not, I would give way at these junctions for my own safety.

That's my take on it anyway.

Beat me to it....