It doesn't get much closer...

[yello]

the sun in their eyes is no excuse

I do wonder if it's something that'd hold water in a court of law as a mitigating factor though. I mean, is sneezing an excuse for rear ending someone?

I'm not suggesting it's not the driver's fault here btw. They are in control of the vehicle, it's they that make they turn. You can't lay bottom line fault with anyone else....BUT in a court of law or insurance claim etc, a justifiable excuse could (and maybe does) limit the degree of culpability perhaps??

In the case where all road users are sharing the same conditions (e.g. wet roads, the effect of the sun, etc) I wonder if, legally, there is not a duty of care sought of thing, or a requirement for prudence, placed on everyone requiring them to exercise a greater degree of caution than normal. I guess if there was, and it could be shown that a road user was negligent of exercising that, then there could be contributory negligence....

...I'm musing btw, thinking out loud.

 

[Origamist]

Can I be the first on CC to apologize to Magnatom for not constructively criticizing his cycling skills over the bank holiday weekend. If I had known this thread was actually a brilliantly constructed thought experiment relating to in-group bias, I would have posted far sooner (certainly not as late as yesterday at 14:23:32, and on the third page of the topic – what was I thinking?).

Magnatom, where we differ is that I consider my riding skills decidedly average (it’s not false modesty) and I am my own harshest critic when it comes to how I cycle. I find this approach far more productive – YMMV. For the record, I do not consider you an “above average cyclist when it comes to cycling safely”.

 

[Origamist]

I do wonder if it's something that'd hold water in a court of law as a mitigating factor though. I mean, is sneezing an excuse for rear ending someone?

I'm not suggesting it's not the driver's fault here btw. They are in control of the vehicle, it's they that make they turn. You can't lay bottom line fault with anyone else....BUT in a court of law or insurance claim etc, a justifiable excuse could (and maybe does) limit the degree of culpability perhaps??

In the case where all road users are sharing the same conditions (e.g. wet roads, the effect of the sun, etc) I wonder if, legally, there is not a duty of care sought of thing, or a requirement for prudence, placed on everyone requiring them to exercise a greater degree of caution than normal. I guess if there was, and it could be shown that a road user was negligent of exercising that, then there could be contributory negligence....

...I'm musing btw, thinking out loud.

They don't always get to a criminal court:

Cyclist died in 'tragic accident'
http://www.buryfreep...nt39.4252841.jp

 

[magnatom]

Magnatom, where we differ is that I consider my riding skills decidedly average (it’s not false modesty) and I am my own harshest critic when it comes to how I cycle. I find this approach far more productive – YMMV. For the record, I do not consider you an “above average cyclist when it comes to cycling safely”.

You have to remember Origamist, I mean above average in the most accurate sense of the word. By that I mean, take all cyclists on the road, and that includes a lot of cyclists who don't seem to take on board any issues regarding their safety, cyclists who don't use lights at night, cyclists who happily filter up the left of HGV's at junctions etc (two days ago when I was driving when it was getting dark I saw 10 cyclists, 7 didn't have lights), then yes i consider myself above average. However, this is only because a lot of cyclists don't take safety seriously. Sad, but from observation true.

I don't see my thinking here as being arrogant at all, just realistic.

Now if I was to compare myself to cyclists on here, who in general think about safety issue (or any other similar grouping of cyclists), and try and cycle accordingly, then I have absolutely no idea where I stand in comparison. Possibly in the lower half, who knows.

You have to remember, by saying I am above average compared to all cyclists is not claiming much when you see some of the very poor cycling out there!

 

[magnatom]

Oh and just to add, Origamist, I think you did pick up on what I had did wrong. You were just being pleasant about it. Although it seems from your last post that I have somehow annoyed you. Sorry if I have.

 

[Origamist]

You have to remember Origamist, I mean above average in the most accurate sense of the word. By that I mean, take all cyclists on the road, and that includes a lot of cyclists who don't seem to take on board any issues regarding their safety, cyclists who don't use lights at night, cyclists who happily filter up the left of HGV's at junctions etc (two days ago when I was driving when it was getting dark I saw 10 cyclists, 7 didn't have lights), then yes i consider myself above average. However, this is only because a lot of cyclists don't take safety seriously. Sad, but from observation true.

I don't see my thinking here as being arrogant at all, just realistic.

Now if I was to compare myself to cyclists on here, who in general think about safety issue (or any other similar grouping of cyclists), and try and cycle accordingly, then I have absolutely no idea where I stand in comparison. Possibly in the lower half, who knows.

You have to remember, by saying I am above average compared to all cyclists is not claiming much when you see some of the very poor cycling out there!

We are using the same terms of reference and I rate you as a "bog standard" cyclist.

 

[Origamist]

Oh and just to add, Origamist, I think you did pick up on what I had did wrong. You were just being pleasant about it. Although it seems from your last post that I have somehow annoyed you. Sorry if I have.

I'm just fooling with you Magnatom - I thought you wanted a kicking in this thread!

 

[magnatom]

Ah, fair enough. With regards to averages, it's possibly the case that in London there is a larger core of committed cyclists than there is here in Glasgow. I have to say, in all honesty, here in Glasgow more than 50% of cyclists probably cycle on the pavement or cycle without lights, etc. So perhaps generalising as above average is a bit of stretch when my only experience is in Glasgow and the surrounding area. Perhaps I should say above average in Glasgow!

 

[magnatom]

Oh and it wasn't a bank holiday in Scotland......

 

[Origamist]

Oh and it wasn't a bank holiday in Scotland......

Good.

 

[yello]

They don't always get to a criminal court

I know... and that's a sad truth, I also know. That wasn't the area of my musing though.

I was considering a legal take on 'fault' and the degrees of, especially in the area of contributory negligence and how far that could reasonably be extended.

 

[Origamist]

I know... and that's a sad truth, I also know. That wasn't the area of my musing though.

I was considering a legal take on 'fault' and the degrees of, especially in the area of contributory negligence and how far that could reasonably be extended.

As regards degrees of responsibility, this would certainly be raised in court. What did the driver do to mitigate the risk - was he wearing polarising glasses, did he adjust his speed, was the windscreen clear, did s/he adjust his head/driving position, did s/he use the visor, had they been driving towards the sun for a long time (making them tired and straining their eyes) all these factors and others would be taken into account.

In terms of a cyclist being hit by a driver in low sun conditions, it would very much depend on the incident. I suspect contributory negligence might be raised in order to limit the payout (most likely the helmet angle), but I cannot see how it would be accepted in terms of what a cyclist could reasonably do (should they pull in, put on a rear light, change route, cycle very slowly etc?).

I've always considered a low sun, particulalry in winter, a serious hazard - certainly more worrying than cycling at night and on par with the thickest fog.

 

[hackbike 666]

well, i think the point here is that Mags was totally in the right, neither car should have turned and, if they couldn't see because of the sun, they should have been more cautious. In a court of law, it was his right of way.

however, i think we can all learn from this one, especially the newbies... check your position against the sun... if your shadow is in front of you oncoming traffic may not see you. If you can't see your shadow, those drivers up your ass probably can't see you. front and rear flashing lights on in low sun conditions, yes? and watch out for those sheep!

and that's just given me another topic for my cycle safety talks at work. Cheers Mag!

No good being in the right when you are in an accident though....I may have been in the right with my landrover thing or the lorry incident but that's no good to me....at the end of the day I want to read (and avoid) any misdemeanour's that said motorists may do...No I wasn't successful with the landrover and had to rely at the end of the day with my landrover mate applying the brake at the last second..I don't care if I was in the right it means nothing to me....What means a lot is avoiding incidents like that.

I was within seconds that day of being transported in the local meat wagon.I always believe in defensive cycling.

 

[fimm]

Apparently something like 80% (or was it 90%, I can't remember) of drivers in a survey thought their driving was above average....

I'm still learning w.r.t. to cycling safely - the two worst near misses I've had have been my fault...

 

[yello]

it would very much depend on the incident

Indeed. I was thinking generally rather than specifically about any one particular incident, but in the case you linked to I doubt there's anything the cyclist could realistically have done. It wasn't clear to me but it reads as though both the cyclist and driver were travelling in the same direction and I guess the cyclist was hit from behind. I contrast this with the example of, say , someone barrelling through an intersection!

I've always considered a low sun, particulalry in winter, a serious hazard - certainly more worring than cycling at night and on par with the thickest fog.

Me too. It's something that I'm perhaps more aware of on my motorcycle than when I'm cycling but it does apply equally.