Fundamentally bus driver is at fault I agree, but the highway code still applies! Bus was in an overtaking position, cyclist was being overtaken. They went through two sets of lights before the bus pulled over. Most people would expect to be well past a cyclist by then.
The bus driver shouldn't have gone into that position if he was planning to pull over of course, and shouldn't have squeezed him out instead he should have let the cyclist past.
168 is basically how people should behave on the road, if people are doing something, make it easy for them (maintain speed). If they cock it up, help them out (slow down).
168 is NOT a rule for allowing overtakes, it is a defensive rule and simply does not apply here (as I said on youtube).
163 and 167 COMPLETLEY override 168 here as:
- the bus is a more dangerous vehicle
- the bus driver is attempting an overtake in the wrong place (through a junction)
- is overtaking at a completely inappropriate place (too near the stop, and as the road narrows)
- is causing conflict with other road users (coming too close to what appears to me to be an inexperienced rider after the way he bailed to the pavement when cut up close)
- the cyclist is NOT speeding up either. *cadence never changes until the late indication and he brakes and swerves)
- the cyclist was first at the lights, the bus driver approaching from behind (so the cyclist has priority)
- the bus driver has to do more than one manouvre to complete his "destination", one at a time is safer.
- the bus driver fails to indicate until he is within 1 foot approx of the kerb and a few feet from the stop (no forewarning)
