Poor driving from someone who should have known better.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Milkfloat

An Peanut
Location
Midlands
So ... how big are these instructors? Are we talking just large, or ... you know, "well-built"?
I would like to introduce you to Linda from Rochdale a 40 year old body building driving instructor.
1590491978884.png

True story.
 

glasgowcyclist

Charming but somewhat feckless
Location
Scotland
Give way means give way ( to me ).


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HNTBOmcOTwM


This particular bit of infrastructure is not ideal, but if I’ve got my arm out to the right, it means they give way. It’s a good job I didn’t take it for granted he was going to give way.:cursing:



I don't see anything in that layout to suggest that anyone turning right across the path of the van can expect right of way.

If the same situation occurs on a normal junction where you are travelling towards a give way sign, as is a van driver coming the other way, would you assume you had priority to turn across his path?
 

Globalti

Legendary Member
Agreed with Drago, the OP was wobbling and hugging the edge of the road and not riding in a way that asserted his rights as a road user. In my experience motorists give space and respect to cyclists who they see obeying the Highway Code because they take them more seriously.
 

winjim

Smash the cistern
In my day-job we routinely analyse farkups "incidents" and ask ourselves:
How could this be prevented?

ONE approach in this case would be a "Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road " on the cycle-path.
(better still, the layout needs a complete overhaul!)

I'll leave to you guys to assign blame , assuming you think that is useful ... :smile:
No, because OP accepts that there is a give way line on each side of the road but interprets it as meaning give way to traffic turning right.

Possibly a sign saying 'cycles crossing, give way' or similar would clarify things?

In terms of blame, if the party involved entered the discussion with the attitude of wanting to learn what other people thought and maybe see if there was any way they could themselves modify their behaviour, rather than assert simply that they are correct and that everybody who disagrees with them is wrong, then it might change the dynamic of the conversation.
 
Last edited:
...
In terms of blame, if the party involved entered the discussion with the attitude of wanting to learn what other people thought and maybe see if there was any way they could themselves modify their behaviour, rather than assert simply that they are correct and that everybody who disagrees with them is wrong, then it might change the dynamic of the conversation.
That would be an Ecumenical matter :smile:
 

Daninplymouth

Senior Member
I can’t see the van driver doing anything untoward you don’t expect to come down a road and have a cyclist cut right across from the opposite side of the road.
I was always taught as a motorcyclist to ride defensively. if you are aware of issues with this crossing then you should approach it with more care. Also no point in arguing or proving a point when your squashed under a lorry, you could be in the right bit you’d still be dead
 

si_c

Guru
Location
Wirral
Just took a moment to watch the full video. 20mph on a mixed use path in close proximity to pedestrians :eek:

Doesn't DfT guidance suggest max 12mph on shared pathways?

I thought it was 18mph, but your point still stands. I'd be on the road once I'm going more than twice walking speed, so say what 10mph?
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
Wrong again. I had my arm out early. Jesus, I don’t get what’s so hard about it. Sooner or later someone’s going to get hurt / killed.
Only if they insist on taking a pig headed approach.

There's a bit in the highway code that says something along the lines of... no one has ultimate right of way and everyone should take necessary action to avoid an incident or collision ...and this includes you, regardless of what you're doing with your arm.
 

winjim

Smash the cistern
But ideally the junction should have been designed to be no more dangerous to a pig-headed cyclist than any "normal" junction.

It clearly IS more dangerous than it needs to be.
Of course, otherwise we wouldn't be arguing about it. QED.
 

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
But ideally the junction should have been designed to be no more dangerous to a pig-headed cyclist than any "normal" junction.

It clearly IS more dangerous than it needs to be.
No more dangerous than a zebra crossing (IMO), on which pedestrians have right of way, but only a pig-headed fool would walk onto one without first making sure that right of way had been granted to them.

Is this particular crossing a known accident black spot?
 

winjim

Smash the cistern
No more dangerous than a zebra crossing (IMO), on which pedestrians have right of way, but only a pig-headed fool would walk onto one without first making sure that right of way had been granted to them.

Is this particular crossing a known accident black spot?
Yeah but we all need to go at the pace of the slowest rider.
 
Top Bottom