Filtering/undertaking

[Jaded]

Filtering cyclists are extremely common in London, you can't say it's something that drivers don't and shouldn't expect.

London and other cities, and towns with a cycle culture, but I can think of plenty of places where they are rare.

You may say that drivers should expect, but you cannot assume they will.

 

[Cab]

London and other cities, and towns with a cycle culture, but I can think of plenty of places where they are rare.

You may say that drivers should expect, but you cannot assume they will.

I don't believe that anyone said that they will, in fact everyone who has thus far commented seems to agree that the problem is that very often they won't. That they should means that if they do not then any accident resulting from that is their fault. That does not mean that it is a good idea to plough on regardless, because we all know that sometimes (often in some towns) that's risky.

 

[MessenJah]

I find it quite sad that people would still blame the driver despite the fact that (a) they weren't at fault and ( the cyclist has taken responsibility.

That kind of attitude probably does cyclists more harm than good.

 

[BentMikey]

You may say that drivers should expect, but you cannot assume they will.

It sounds like you're making out that I should know this and don't, when it's what I've said from the start. DKUATB!!!

What Cab said, basically.

Messenjah, it's very possible to take responsibility for something that isn't your fault, legally. This is why insurance co.s tell you never to admit fault. I think we all accept that you should have ridden differently there, i.e. more defensively, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the driver's fault.

 

[Disgruntled Goat]

I'm going to court on 10th November to prosecute a driver who left hooked me whilst I was filtering on the left. I'll let you know what the verdict is. I must admit things don't seem clear re filtering but I believe the driver has a duty of care (as does the cyclist).

 

[Cab]

I find it quite sad that people would still blame the driver despite the fact that (a) they weren't at fault and ( the cyclist has taken responsibility.

That kind of attitude probably does cyclists more harm than good.

The motorist was at fault. If the cyclist has accepted responsibility, he is in error. That the cyclist could have avoided the incident doesn't make it his fault; why should it?

It is the attitude that motorists should not be expected to obey the law that does us more harm than anything else.

 

[col]

She can't have checked properly then, and should have. Filtering cyclists are extremely common in London, you can't say it's something that drivers don't and shouldn't expect.

OTOH I'd probably feel the brunt of my own failure to predict the obvious if I'd done the same as messenjah. Still doesn't change the fact that the driver screwed up and would be liable for any damages.

Its unfair to say she didnt check properly,how far can you see if a large vehicle is there,also i dont suppose anyone expects an undertake at a junction
when they are turning?As cyclists we cant say they didnt check properly,when we should also be checking to see if anything is coming and reacting accordingly.Its too easy to say its their fault,we should be looking too?Now if it was a motor vehicle that had appeared from behind the vehicle as we were turning right?i wonder if you would be saying the same thing?

 

[Jaded]

Its unfair to say she didnt check properly,how far can you see if a large vehicle is there,also i dont suppose anyone expects an undertake at a junction
when they are turning?As cyclists we cant say they didnt check properly,when we should also be checking to see if anything is coming and reacting accordingly.Its too easy to say its their fault,we should be looking too?Now if it was a motor vehicle that had appeared from behind the vehicle as we were turning right?i wonder if you would be saying the same thing?

This is a key point.

 

[Cab]

This is a key point.

Is it? Sorry, why? Where does it say anywhere in the highway code or anywhere else that filtering on the left is LESS likely at a junction?

 

[Jaded]

The HC is a book.

The roads are for real.

 

[mr_cellophane]

Any filtering is risky whether on the left or right of stationary traffic. On the left there is the danger of cars turning right into a junction and on te right there is the danger of cars pulling out from a junction to turn right.
I always watch for large gaps in queues of traffic and assume that a car is about to appear from it.

 

[swee'pea99]

I have to say I'm baffled by some of the comments that appear on these boards. As Messenjah says, what else could the driver have done? Short of having x-ray eyes.

As for Messenjah, he's conceded - quite rightly in my view - that he was at fault, for riding into a blind spot at a speed that made him unable to stop in time if something turned out to be there. What if a pedestrian had been crossing the road at that point (through the stationary traffic)? They do, you know. Or should I say, 'we do, you know'.

Personally I would never undertake - or overtake for that matter - into a blind spot like that at anything above walking speed: ie, a speed from which I'd be able to prevent an accident even if the worst possible scenario - a mother pushing a tot in a pushchair, say - were to happen.

Blaming drivers for their lack of x-ray eyes seems to me an odd way of making friends and influencing people.

 

[BentMikey]

If you're turning right, you're responsible for checking that it's safe to proceed. Just because motor vehicles are stopped and/or have left a gap for you to turn across the junction, doesn't mean that it's clear to go. You're still responsible for checking for filtering two-wheeled and other traffic, and not to do so is stupid. Filtering PTWs and bicycles are *extremely* common, so the driver has no excuse for not knowing about the possibility.

As a driver I expect to turn carefully in this situation, and I expect to have to check both sides of the queue in turn to make sure that it's safe for me to cross. It's not difficult, and nor is checking for and allowing pedestrians to cross the side road.

I'd bet that that sort of driver will have had previous, and possibly also previous with pedestrians crossing the side road, despite the highway code advice on this.

 

[Baggy]

I've done almost exactly the same as Messenjah (when I was new to cycling), but without crashing. Difference was that I was in a dedicated cycle lane...the driver was very apologetic and now I'm always very careful in that kind of situation.

I felt as if it was my fault for not double checking, but the bike lane should have reminded the driver to have double checked as well.

The driver should have checked, but then I was blatting along pretty quickly and should have been more cautious. In cases like this sometimes there's no blame, just two people not quite doing the right thing.

 

[Jaded]

Well put, Mr P.