Legality of not using cycle lane

[Nataliecycles]

I was recently mowed over by a car behind me at a roundabout. There is a cycle path just before the roundabout which takes you on a diversion to avoid the road, however I don't use it as it is a narrow pedestrian-priority path with cycle access, and requires you to cross 2 pedestrian crossings instead of just cycling on the road across the roundabout. I am now not sure whether legally I have right of way on the road if there is an alternative route...

Any advice welcome!

Natalie

 

[Spinney]

Hi Natalie
In the UK, cyclists are not required to use cycle paths, so your 'rights' to use the road are not affected by the existence of the cycle path.

And welcome to CycleChat!

 

[Nataliecycles]

Thank you for that. I was worried because the defendants insurance company have asked why I wasn't using the cycle lane.

 

[fossyant]

You are not required to use one.

I wasn't using the 100 yard cycle lane when I was knocked off in November.

I had filtered down the outside of traffic and was visible to on-coming cars. Had I filtered down the inside, I would have been hidden by the stationery cars. Still didn't stop a blind driver going for what he thought was a gap, and hitting me side on.

You are not at fault.

 

[fossyant]

Shows the defendant's insurance company havent a clue. You were hit from behind...

 

[ianrauk]

From the Highway Code...to show your defendants insurance company morons.

Rule 63
Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). When using a cycle lane, keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

 

[vickster]

You had every right to be on the roundabout. Get your solicitor to manage this situation as it should be managed

 

[e-rider]

their solicitor will try every trick in the book to avoid paying out and make you feel guilty - get a solicitor that knows the HC - solicitors are not cheap though, which can be another tactic - run your bill up so you drop the case
Justice seems to be only a very small part of the legal system and sometimes no part at all!

 

[123456789]

Thank you for that. I was worried because the defendants insurance company have asked why I wasn't using the cycle lane.

Sounds to me like they are going to try claim contributory negligence. As others have pointed out you are not obliged to use the cycle lane however the last 7 words of rule 63 may give a lawyer some wriggle room.

Are you with CTC or anyone like that?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Thank you for that. I was worried because the defendants insurance company have asked why I wasn't using the cycle lane.

You don't have to use it nor to you have to justify your choice to the insurers. See also http://www.ctc.org.uk/news/2007-01-27/cyclist-who-refused-to-stay-in-gutter-wins-re-trial and maybe refer the insurers to that.

GC

 

[growingvegetables]

There's also

"Rule 76
Full details about the correct procedure at roundabouts (my emphasis) are contained in Rules 184 to 190. Roundabouts can be hazardous and should be approached with care.

Rule 77
You may feel safer walking your cycle round on the pavement or verge. If you decide to ride round keeping to the left-hand lane you should

• be aware that drivers may not easily see you
• take extra care when cycling across exits. You may need to signal right to show you are not leaving the roundabout
• watch out for vehicles crossing your path to leave or join the roundabout."

And
"Rule 187
In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to

• 
  
• cyclists and horse riders who may stay in the left-hand lane and signal right if they intend to continue round the roundabout. Allow them to do so (my emphasis again)
• "

Bottom line - roundabouts are dangerous; you choose your safe route. And, even if it is "unorthodox", it is up to the motor vehicle to allow you to do so! According to the HC.

 

[doug]

Shows the defendant's insurance company havent a clue. You were hit from behind...

I'd argue that it shows that they do have a clue, but are hoping that the victim doesn't and will therefore settle for less compensation.

 

[jefmcg]

Wrong question. They should be asking their clients why they ran into you.

As an aside - I often notice these cycling routes around crossing a not only a lot further, but often not very safe either, putting you in conflict with cars more than on a normal crossing. But don't bring up any of this with the solicitor if you are dealing directly with her. As others have said, you probably should get your own lawyer. As it's sounds the case it pretty clear, I imagine you can find one willing to do a "no win/no fee" arrangement.

 

[classic33]

Do what I did, point out that your bicycle is classified as a road vehicle.

As others have already pointed out, the requirement to use cycle lanes is not compulsory. The same for what may be the next thing raised, Hi-Vis and helmet.

I'd never get out if roundabouts couldn't be used!

 

[Drago]

Bet you wish you'd played "Dodge the Pedestrian" now