Left hook video - Tooting

[Domus]

IMO bike rider was well behind the the car with it's indicator on, the car slowed to allow the other bike to pass the junction. Bike rider never slowed at all. Muppet methinks.

 

[Vantage]

They're both idiots.
The driver was in the wrong to not only cross a lane without ensuring it was safe to do so but to enter a lane where it was not allowed.
Cyclist should have noted the indicator flashing and waited. If someone indicates they are about to fire a gun, one doesn't just wander in front of it. Same with indicating vehicles.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I wonder if the offending driver even bothered his/her arse getting insurance..

Might explain why s/he didn’t get out to check for damage or remonstrate with the rider.

 

[winjim]

The real story is the irresponsible suggestion of blame on the part of the cyclist by South London press, which was only partially corrected after a pile-on from cycling twitter.


View: https://twitter.com/SthLondonPress/status/1311584792786411521?s=19

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Yeah this simply isn't anything like the cyclists fault.

 

[boydj]

While I agree that the driver was totally to blame, I do think that a regular commuter cyclist would have seen that one coming - and to be fair to the cyclist, I think he was prepared for what happened given his reaction and I'm pretty sure it was with a loud warning to the driver which stopped him in his tracks.

I always get a 'tingle' when a car passes me with the left indicator going and I'm prepared to shout and/or take evasive action. Usually the shout is enough to prevent an incident.

 

[Slick]

I love the way everyone thinks they have far greater spider senses than the rider being discussed when the truth is some of us may or may not have managed to avoid the collision but it's just another distraction from the real underlying root cause of the problem.

 

[Jenkins]

Nothing to do with the incident, but whay have the separator bollards been positioned inside the cycle lane, narrowing it a bit?

 

[rogerzilla]

I'd say cyclist - you undertake at your own risk, it's not legal unless traffic is stationary or slow-moving, and even then it's hugely dangerous - but mainly it's the crap bike lane giving a false sense of security.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I'd say cyclist - you undertake at your own risk, it's not legal unless traffic is stationary or slow-moving, and even then it's hugely dangerous - but mainly it's the crap bike lane giving a false sense of security.

Filtering down the nearside has any number of hazards; left hook as here, passengers bailing out, pedestrians stepping in the gutter, rubbish in the gutter, storm drains, broken surfaces or slippy thermoplastic paint. Painting the filtering area blue doesn't reduce those very much, if at all.

 

[winjim]

I'd say cyclist - you undertake at your own risk, it's not legal unless traffic is stationary or slow-moving, and even then it's hugely dangerous - but mainly it's the crap bike lane giving a false sense of security.

Overtaking on the left is illegal? Even in a bike lane? Can you point me in the direction of a source for that please?

 

[figbat]

Overtaking on the left is illegal? Even in a bike lane? Can you point me in the direction of a source for that please?

Pretty sure there is no specific offence for overtaking on the left in any vehicle or on any highway, although it could easily be taken as careless/reckless/dangerous driving and be treated according. Certain situations do mitigate it though.

 

[rogerzilla]

Overtaking on the left is illegal? Even in a bike lane? Can you point me in the direction of a source for that please?

Highway Code rule 163.

Now...drivers shouldn't overtake a bike and then immediately turn left, but that's not really what happened here; the bike and car were pretty much moving together.

(I'm ignoring the fact that the left turn itself was illegal unless it was for access, and the tax/MOT issues).

In any case, it's unwise to rely on the rules of the road or the compliance of drivers with those rules to keep you safe. You end up dead and they get a £300 fine.

 

[figbat]

Highway Code rule 163.

...is not law.

(I'm ignoring the fact that the left turn itself was illegal unless it was for access...).

There is no "access" allowed - for a motor vehicle it is No Left Turn, end of sentence. You can't ignore it since it is significant to the incident.

In any case, it's unwise to rely on the rules of the road or the compliance of drivers with those rules to keep you safe. You end up dead and they get a £300 fine.

Here we agree, although this guy didn't end up dead, nor even injured, but I get the point.

 

[winjim]

Highway Code rule 163.

Not illegal then.