Hard Impact; Where does fault lie?

[NorvernRob]

Philosophical question

'if a grand piano were to drop for the sky and land on a law abiding road-going cyclist would some nobber-drivers in this forum still blame the cyclist for cycling there?'

That would be a completely unforeseen, surprising event. There's no way anyone could avoid it.

A car turning right in front of you isn't surprising or unexpected in the slightest, and the cyclist in the video could quite easily have avoided running into the car. If I drove like he cycled I'd have regular crashes but I don't, I expect people to turn in front of me, pull out on me etc and that's why I've never had a car accident.

It wasn't the cyclists fault but he most certainly could have avoided it and saved himself some pain just by being aware of the situation and what could happen.

 

[Garethgas]

The cyclist seems to be inexperienced to me. Blame is somewhat irrelevant.
Had the cyclist been more experienced, he would have anticipated the possibility of someone turning right.
In fairness to the driver, he only had a few seconds to see the cyclist zoom from the inside of the lane.
Had the cyclist been a bit more sensible he would have slowed down and been in a position to stop sooner.
I do agree though that it was the driver who was in the wrong
But being right is a fool's epitaph

 

[format]

But being right is a fool's epitaph

Being right also matters in terms of compensation. If you wreck your bike in a crash that wasn't your fault, then being right matters quite a bit.

 

[Rouge79]

Legally and morally the car driver is at fault.

However some crap riding by the cyclist. He has passed both the motorcycle and car whose brake lights have come on. I know whenever i'm in that situation i will always slow down.

Being in the right or staying alive?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

No, they should go out and ride according to the wise guidance of John Franklin in Cyclecraft (at such junctions) ....always ensure that you leave yourself a sufficient margin of error for the aggressive driver who flouts all the rules....

precisely. Ride a turbo.

 

[Labradorofperception]

I drove past that spot on the way home tonight and paused to look at it. For a car turning right, you have a good view of the opposite bike lane - riders are framed nicely in front of the white walls of the Packhorse pub. also, note another cyclist immediately behind in the splat - it's a busy bike lane.

Basically, to fail to see a rider takes a lot of doing. Also, it is box junction, the gap is expected and the traffic stops for a pelican a little further down, then a full set of lights and traffic is generally slow there. The Brake lights will be on and off all the time, no real indicator sadly.

 

[vickster]

If it's a busy potentially risky junction, all the more reason to be cautious

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Best bet? Drive to work, or at least get the bus.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

That would be a completely unforeseen, surprising event. There's no way anyone could avoid it.

A car turning right in front of you isn't surprising or unexpected in the slightest, and the cyclist in the video could quite easily have avoided running into the car. If I drove like he cycled I'd have regular crashes but I don't, I expect people to turn in front of me, pull out on me etc and that's why I've never had a car accident.

It wasn't the cyclists fault but he most certainly could have avoided it and saved himself some pain just by being aware of the situation and what could happen.

SMIDSYs are foreseeable and unsurprising

 

[Cycling Dan]

Is a cycle lane legally its own lane or not. I cant find anything in the highway code and I am unsure.
I thought that a cycle lane was like any other lane.

 

[Cycling Dan]

SMIDSYs are foreseeable and unsurprising

I disagree

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvVouuH4tLQ

 

[vickster]

Is a cycle lane legally its own lane or not. I cant find anything in the highway code and I am unsure.
I thought that a cycle lane was like any other lane.

That one has a broken line so cars are allowed to enter, solid white line they are not. I'd say it's part of the left hand lane

 

[snorri]

In fairness to the driver, he only had a few seconds to see the cyclist zoom from the inside of the lane.

......but the cyclist did not "zoom from the inside of the lane", the cyclist was occupying the lane that is marked for the use of cyclists. It was the driver who "zoomed " through the box and crossed the cycle lane without checking for traffic in the lane, and failed to enter the side road on the appropriate side of the road markings.Things could easily have been worse had there been a vehicle approaching the junction from the side road.
I can't understand why you should want to plead for fairness to a driver who showed a disregard for road traffic law and a callous disregard for the safety of other road users.

 

[Garethgas]

......but the cyclist did not "zoom from the inside of the lane", the cyclist was occupying the lane that is marked for the use of cyclists. It was the driver who "zoomed " through the box and crossed the cycle lane without checking for traffic in the lane, and failed to enter the side road on the appropriate side of the road markings.Things could easily have been worse had there been a vehicle approaching the junction from the side road.
I can't understand why you should feel any need to plea for fairness to a driver who showed a disregard for road traffic law and a callous disregard for the safety of other road users.

It's quite simple really.
My interest is in self preservation not self righteousness. I (and I'm sure many others) would never have put myself in that position.
I've already agreed that he motorist was at fault but my point was that the cyclist could/should have adjusted his speed accordingly.
I am always having to compensate for others' shortcomings, it's how I survive.
I know it shouldn't be but it just seems to be a fact of life.

 

[theclaud]

[QUOTE 3016560, member: 9609"]It is a question I would love to know the answer too; How many accidents involving two vehicles (bikes, cars, vans, lorries) could have been completely avoided had the person who was not technically to blame had been a better and more observant driver/rider?[/QUOTE]

Technically?

I confess I'm baffled by the logic.