Filtering/undertaking

[swee'pea99]

So what's a driver to do in that situation? Not go at all, on account of some cyclist *may* come speeding through on the inside?

"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."

Sorry, but that's palpable nonsense. By the time the right-turning driver is in a position to see up the inside of the stopped vehicle, his/her bonnet is already a metre up the side road.

By Messenjah's account, the turning driver had done everything that could reasonably have been asked of her. To turn around and start declaring her 'at fault' is totally unrealistic, and can only serve to heighten antagonism between road-users, as well as strengthen the conviction among many that we ('self-righteous/arrogant') cyclists don't live in the real world.

 

[BentMikey]

Sweetpea, it's you that's talking nonsense. I think what you really mean is that you want to turn right quickly and impatiently, and don't want to spare the time to look properly as the highway code demands of you.

Rule 211:
"It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, at roundabouts, overtaking you or filtering through traffic. Always look out for them before you emerge from a junction; they could be approaching faster than you think. When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing. Be especially careful when turning, and when changing direction or lane. Be sure to check mirrors and blind spots carefully."

Rule 170 and 180 state much the same thing: Rule 180:
Rule 180:
"Wait until there is a safe gap between you and any oncoming vehicle. Watch out for cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and other road users. Check your mirrors and blind spot again to make sure you are not being overtaken, then make the turn. Do not cut the corner. Take great care when turning into a main road; you will need to watch for traffic in both directions and wait for a safe gap."

 

[swee'pea99]

No, BM, as ever, what I mean is what I say. Certainly "When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing." But there's nothing in Messenjah's account to suggest the driver wasn't doing exactly that. To the extent that anyone (without x-ray eyes) can.

The fact remains, in tight traffic, given that the driver's head is seven or eight feet behind the end of the bonnet, the front of a right-turning vehicle is going to be into the side street before the driver can physically see up the inside of, say, a bus or van.

A cyclist riding at speed into a blind spot has only themselves to blame if they come a cropper. And if they hurt anyone else, shame on them.

 

[John the Monkey]

Just to play Devil's avocado for a minute here, if the onus is on the driver (as they are crossing the traffic, in this case) to make the turn safely, *should* they be turning if they can't see around the vehicles forming the "gap" enough to be sure that their way is clear?

 

[BentMikey]

Just to play Devil's avocado for a minute here, if the onus is on the driver (as they are crossing the traffic, in this case) to make the turn safely, *should* they be turning if they can't see around the vehicles forming the "gap" enough to be sure that their way is clear?

Exactly.

Sweatpea extreme example of the bonnet getting in the way is very unlikely. For the most part only a small fraction of the bonnet will stick out, the right corner. His example length will only apply if the car has already turned right through 90 degrees. In perhaps 95% of traffic situations I've been driving in, it's always been easily possible to see down either side of the queueing traffic.

If you take the example of riding down a bus lane, or Baggy's cycle lane, then there is no excuse for the driver not having looked properly. They were crossing a second lane of traffic where they couldn't see, and yet sweatpea says this isn't the driver's fault.

 

[hackbike 6]

I think both should take the responsibility.

I know it's easy to get caught out in these situations.

 

[MessenJah]

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.

Sorry, but who was driving the car and who was on the bike? You?

She was already most of the way through the turn when I emerged from beside the vehicle in front. The fact that she slammed on the brakes well before she could cause me any damage showed that at least she was paying attention to what was in front of her, that she was alert and that she has a decent reaction time.

Tell me, how could the woman have possibly seen me until it was too late?

Should she have been driving at 0.05mph and wearing infra-red goggles just in case a muppet on a bike happened to suddenly appear from behind a vehicle?

 

[BentMikey]

So you're saying both you and the driver were steaming headlong into a spot where you couldn't see if you needed to stop!!

We all know what both should have done better in terms of defensive riding and driving, but this is about actual fault. Who had priority, and who failed to cede priority?

 

[Cab]

Sorry, but who was driving the car and who was on the bike? You?

She was already most of the way through the turn when I emerged from beside the vehicle in front. The fact that she slammed on the brakes well before she could cause me any damage showed that at least she was paying attention to what was in front of her, that she was alert and that she has a decent reaction time.

Tell me, how could the woman have possibly seen me until it was too late?

Should she have been driving at 0.05mph and wearing infra-red goggles just in case a muppet on a bike happened to suddenly appear from behind a vehicle?

Mmmh hm. She was aware enough to stop and not trundle straight over you. She did this, thus you survived. She's turned across in front of you, and didn't kill you... And thats whats meant to happen. Had she properly levelled you, i.e. if you emerged very fast from the blind spot and got flattened, it would have been her fault, and should there have been a court case then your actions would count against you in deciding her penalty and any compensation.

This really is what several people have been saying, in one way or another; that its the fault of a motorist in such a situation is clearly true (and thats the law, live with it). That a cyclist must do what he may to reduce risk is also true. The latter does not change the former. Don't like it? Write to your MP.

 

[swee'pea99]

Come on, give it up Messenjah - what do you know? You were only there.

 

[Cab]

[quote name='swee'pea99']Come on, give it up Messenjah - what do you know? You were only there.[/QUOTE]

A fair point well made

If Messenjah wants to take responsibility for anything at all, right or wrong, thats up to him. Good luck to you Messenjah, hope things work out well for you.

 

[swee'pea99]

C'mon Messenjah, what do you know? You were only there...

 

[swee'pea99]

Oops, trouble wit' browser. Sorry for duplication.

 

[John Ponting]

problem with Browser or User's Fingers ?

 

[Jaded]

If Messenjah wants to take responsibility for anything at all, right or wrong, thats up to him. Good luck to you Messenjah, hope things work out well for you.

It sounds to me that he takes responsibility for his safety.