Pedestrian Collision

[mjr]

Please, please tell me you are playing some seriously niche gangster rap out of the sound system...

Seriously niche is the phrase! It usually plays a rather random mix of royalty-free (Creative Commons, out of copyright, whatever...) bicycle-related music in all different styles - not much gangster rap yet though.

 

[buggi]

You did nothing technically wrong, it was the pedestrians responsibility to look before crossing. HOWEVER you could have anticipated it and avoided it. You knew you couldn't see beyond the HGV and therefore it stands to reason that anything beyond the HGV couldn't see you. Also the traffic was stationary and therefore there are likely to be people taking the chance to cross, just as cars take the chance to pull in and out of side roads. You should always proceed with care where you can't see ahead or something is blocking your view of the road, even if only partially. If a driver drove round a blind corner on his side of the road and crashed into a stationery vehicle or horse, you could say he didn't technically do anything wrong because he was on his side of the road, however we would all know that he shouldn't have presumed the way was clear, and proceeded with care, and the same rule applies in this scenario.

This is the difference between responsibility and avoidability. Practicing this can avoid both you, or a pedestrian, becoming injured.

 

[vickster]

I don't think the OP was at fault, even with his speed. You are taught not to between parked vehicles and if you do you have to check before stepping out, if the ped had of done this then there would have been no collision.
If I had been the OP I would have been spitting feathers at the ped!

Except the highway code does tell road users to look out for more vulnerable road users - i.e. cyclists look out for ped, and to moderate speed where there are potential hazards, i.e. lorries

 

[cd365]

Except the highway code does tell road users to look out for more vulnerable road users - i.e. cyclists look out for ped, and to moderate speed where there are potential hazards, i.e. lorries

It was 19mph, that's not exactly head down busting a gut. I am not a fan of this "you must slow down to a suitable speed to avoid morons who might do something stupid in front of you" attitude that seems to be getting more and more common on here. What is a suitable speed? In @buggi 's example above the only safe thing to do was to stop, get off and walk past the lorry, or go at less than walking speed. Who in reality does that? This is the real world and other road users should take care when using the road, but to expect everyone to come to an almost stop when using a cycle lane in this instance just will not happen. Personally I don't filter nor use cycle lanes, too dangerous!

I do not cycle thinking about the "what if" scenarios, if I did I wouldn't get on my bike, car or motorcycle. I have to trust that other people take as much reasonable care as I do.

 

[glenn forger]

Except the highway code does tell road users to look out for more vulnerable road users - i.e. cyclists look out for ped, and to moderate speed where there are potential hazards, i.e. lorries

No it does not. There is nothing in the HC that says slow down near lorries.

 

[Drago]

I'm not a fan of that attitude either, though there's a lot to be said for it if it stops a ped dismounting you and breaking your neck.

 

[mjr]

I'm also not a fan of that attitude but I've been around long enough that it's second nature to think about some reasonable "what if"s, like what my emergency exit is if another person doesn't take reasonable care, which often means backing off a bit and covering the brakes (and some scenarios would result in my bike colliding with a careless person or their vehicle while I land in a heap on the verge!). Everything has "what if"s. What if you don't get on you bike, car or motorcycle? Are you going to waste away tucked up in bed? Ask a supermarket worker to reverse a van at your house? What if they get the throttle instead of the footbrake? Everything has "what if"s.

 

[vickster]

It was 19mph, that's not exactly head down busting a gut. I am not a fan of this "you must slow down to a suitable speed to avoid morons who might do something stupid in front of you" attitude that seems to be getting more and more common on here. What is a suitable speed? In @buggi 's example above the only safe thing to do was to stop, get off and walk past the lorry, or go at less than walking speed. Who in reality does that? This is the real world and other road users should take care when using the road, but to expect everyone to come to an almost stop when using a cycle lane in this instance just will not happen. Personally I don't filter nor use cycle lanes, too dangerous!

I do not cycle thinking about the "what if" scenarios, if I did I wouldn't get on my bike, car or motorcycle. I have to trust that other people take as much reasonable care as I do.

That's faster than I would cycle on the flat in traffic ever. In traffic downhill I would't ride that fast either, too risky

10 mph covering the brakes is perfectly reasonable in such circumstances. Some nasty injuries documented on this site of people who were going fast and a car cut across through queuing traffic. Yes, you can sue the driver and get a few quid, not much good if you're dead though

I don't think what the OP describes constitutes reasonable care, but we are all entitled to an opinion

How was the ped, do we know?

 

[cd365]

but we are all entitled to an opinion

It is all about opinions, life would be boring if we all thought the same

 

[vickster]

In this case, there might be a less battered pedestrian though (and possibly less battered cyclist and bike)

Did the OP report the accident, check the ped was ok, exchange details if needed etc?

 

[Pale Rider]

Barrelling along at 19mph into a series of blind corners is reckless.

It's fast enough to beat a pedestrian's left/right glance.

But were I the ped I would have stuck my head out from in front of the lorry for a look.

And probably been clouted by your elbow as you whizzed past.

 

[vickster]

Presumably this queuing traffic was in a built up area where there might be pedestrians around, not on a dual carriageway for example?

 

[cd365]

Let's red flag cyclists!
If a ped can't look left and right and see a cyclist in the cycle lane that he wants to cross then they better get themself to Specsavers and fast!

I would put money on the ped not wanting to give any details since they were at fault

 

[vickster]

The OP presumably posted to get opinions, the view seems to be that he was going too fast given the traffic conditions, the presence of the lorry etc. We don't know what the lighting was like, whether he had good lights, the pedestrian may have already been in the cycle path or not, they may or may not have looked properly but a bike coming at sort of speed may not have been very obvious especially if poorly lit
Hopefully some sort of lesson was learnt and nobody was seriously hurt

 

[Firestorm]

One on Mansell st this evening
slightly different situation.
bso going wrong way down the one way street in the cycle lane , ped pulling a case on wheels steps off at the pelican when the road is completely clear the right way.
cyclist struck the case , last seen muttering and trying to straighten his handlebars....