New priority rules and clearances for turning cars?

[Time Waster]

What does the rules say about how far cars need to be from cyclists before turning after passing the cyclists?

Car overtook me then turned left. I wasn't going as quick as I could have been so he turned without really causing me to slow down. It still got me thinking that the priority rule doesn't stop overtakes before turning. It doesn't stop cyclists reaching junctions as cars are turning left. There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

I think it could but I just wonder if it's going to be clear and obvious enough to affect m changes? Should that car have sat behind me or not? What clearance is acceptable?

 

[MichaelW2]

What does the rules say about how far cars need to be from cyclists before turning after passing the cyclists?

Car overtook me then turned left. I wasn't going as quick as I could have been so he turned without really causing me to slow down. It still got me thinking that the priority rule doesn't stop overtakes before turning. It doesn't stop cyclists reaching junctions as cars are turning left. There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

I think it could but I just wonder if it's going to be clear and obvious enough to affect m changes? Should that car have sat behind me or not? What clearance is acceptable?

That should be covered by current laws if anyone could be boverred to prosecute. I was almost left hooked yestetday, right opposite the police ststion.

 

[classic33]

Changes coming on the 29th of next month.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/n...-confusion-says-aa.281998/page-4#post-6617744

 

[PK99]

What does the rules say about how far cars need to be from cyclists before turning after passing the cyclists?

Car overtook me then turned left. I wasn't going as quick as I could have been so he turned without really causing me to slow down. It still got me thinking that the priority rule doesn't stop overtakes before turning. It doesn't stop cyclists reaching junctions as cars are turning left. There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

I think it could but I just wonder if it's going to be clear and obvious enough to affect m changes? Should that car have sat behind me or not? What clearance is acceptable?

I make sure I "take the lane" when passing junctions.

 

[Baldy]

There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

No.

 

[mjr]

There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

Where did you read that?

If nothing else, overtaking cyclists properly can more easily be included in the driving tests.

 

[Alex321]

What does the rules say about how far cars need to be from cyclists before turning after passing the cyclists?

It doesn't actually specify a clearance as such.

What the new version says (will say, it does not take effect until 29/01/2022) is:

Rule H3 Rule for drivers and motorcyclists
You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction or changing direction or lane, just as you would not turn across the path of another motor vehicle. This applies whether they are using a cycle lane, a cycle track, or riding ahead on the road and you should give way to them.
Do not turn at a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist, horse rider or horse drawn vehicle going straight ahead to stop or swerve. You should stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists if necessary. This includes when cyclists are:
• approaching, passing or moving off from a junction
• moving past or waiting alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic
• travelling around a roundabout

Car overtook me then turned left. I wasn't going as quick as I could have been so he turned without really causing me to slow down. It still got me thinking that the priority rule doesn't stop overtakes before turning. It doesn't stop cyclists reaching junctions as cars are turning left. There's going to be no enforcement except with serious injury so does it make a positive, real world effect on this left turn issue?

I think it could but I just wonder if it's going to be clear and obvious enough to affect m changes? Should that car have sat behind me or not? What clearance is acceptable?

There will be no enforcement as such, because the Highway Code does not have the force of law. It is likely to be taken into account when determining culpability in the case of an accident, everything it says as "should" is guidance only.

 

[Time Waster]

Stop or swerve? What about slow or ease up? Drivers, myself included, haven't proven to be that great about judging speed of cyclists at the best of time. I nearly got run over by a truck once because of an overtake not taking into account the simple fact that I was also moving at a speed only just slower than the overtaking truck.

I think if you're turning left at a junction once you pass the junction sign on the road you should not overtake cyclists before turning left. Or some similar turn distance marker. I just think a distance marker is needed not just a commandment that relies on good judgement. Not sure how sensible this idea is. Noone is perfect on the road so coming from a quality background error proofing seems a better idea than judgement alone in higher risk areas of road use.

What do you think of that idea? Won't happen though.

 

[Alex321]

Stop or swerve? What about slow or ease up? Drivers, myself included, haven't proven to be that great about judging speed of cyclists at the best of time. I nearly got run over by a truck once because of an overtake not taking into account the simple fact that I was also moving at a speed only just slower than the overtaking truck.

I think if you're turning left at a junction once you pass the junction sign on the road you should not overtake cyclists before turning left. Or some similar turn distance marker. I just think a distance marker is needed not just a commandment that relies on good judgement. Not sure how sensible this idea is. Noone is perfect on the road so coming from a quality background error proofing seems a better idea than judgement alone in higher risk areas of road use.

What do you think of that idea? Won't happen though.

No, it won't

That would require the HC to be more than just recommendations, since it would require additional signage to be installed before most junctions.

 

[Milkfloat]

Stop or swerve? What about slow or ease up? Drivers, myself included, haven't proven to be that great about judging speed of cyclists at the best of time. I nearly got run over by a truck once because of an overtake not taking into account the simple fact that I was also moving at a speed only just slower than the overtaking truck.

I think if you're turning left at a junction once you pass the junction sign on the road you should not overtake cyclists before turning left. Or some similar turn distance marker. I just think a distance marker is needed not just a commandment that relies on good judgement. Not sure how sensible this idea is. Noone is perfect on the road so coming from a quality background error proofing seems a better idea than judgement alone in higher risk areas of road use.

What do you think of that idea? Won't happen though.

By far the majority of drivers do not left hook cyclists, rather than yet more horrible road furniture, bad drivers should just learn to drive correctly. I have never come close to left hooking someone as I will always err on the side of caution and not try to overtake if I am planning a turn. It is not rocket science, the problem is lack of enforcement.

 

[Alex321]

By far the majority of drivers do not left hook cyclists, rather than yet more horrible road furniture, bad drivers should just learn to drive correctly.

Indeed.

Here is an example of a driver this morning behaving exactly as one might hope

View: https://youtu.be/Z9Et4fr-g7o


Comes past me (while I'm in the bollarded off cycle lane), indicates left, then pauses and waits for me to pass before turning.

 

[mjr]

That would require the HC to be more than just recommendations, since it would require additional signage to be installed before most junctions.

Most of the junctions where drivers left hook around here (the bigger ones) already have warning or direction signs or both, so the additional signage might not be much.

The HC is slightly more than recommendations for drivers, but I think I know what you mean: non compliance with one rule once probably won't be prosecuted.

 

[Alex321]

Most of the junctions where drivers left hook around here (the bigger ones) already have warning or direction signs or both, so the additional signage might not be much.

The HC is slightly more than recommendations for drivers, but I think I know what you mean: non compliance with one rule once probably won't be prosecuted.

Rules that say "should" or "should not" are no more than recommendations.

It is only ones which say "MUST" or "MUST NOT" which have the force of law - and then it is not the HC itself which carries that force, it is the law that is referenced.

You cannot be prosecuted for breaching HC rules - though those rules can of course be taken into account when determining charges of careless or dangerous driving or similar.

 

[mjr]

You cannot be prosecuted for breaching HC rules - though those rules can of course be taken into account when determining charges of careless or dangerous driving or similar.

Or, in other words, you can effectively be prosecuted for breaching HC rules if you breach enough of them badly enough that it's regarded as careless driving.

 

[Alex321]

Or, in other words, you can effectively be prosecuted for breaching HC rules if you breach enough of them badly enough that it's regarded as careless driving.

In so far as breaching the HC rules means you are breaching the standards normally expected of a competent driver, yes.

But the HC itself, in the Introduction states:
Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.