Traffic sign query

[steverob]

When you see one of these signs below, is the traffic from the other direction mandated to stop and give way to you, or is it that you've just theoretically got priority, but they can still squeeze through if there's room and they think it's safe?

Reason is while out cycling today, I came across a narrow bridge which had one of these signs on my side, so I carried on cycling. However, out of the three cars coming the other way towards me, the first one decided not to stop and continued on, while the other two waited for me to finish crossing.

Now, as this bridge wasn't all THAT narrow - I'd say it was one and a half lanes wide, easily room for my bike and a car to get across together, while two cars wouldn't have been able to without wing mirror damage - I wasn't sure if what the car driver did was wrong or just impatient but still legal. To be fair, the gap between his car and my bike was still reasonable - I had much closer passes elsewhere on the ride from traffic overtaking me on a two lane road. Because of this I didn't shout at or gesticulate to him, because I didn't feel in any danger, but I did feel he was being a little bit dodgy.

The guy in the first of the two cars that did stop to allow me to finish crossing the bridge did (or at least I think he did) give me an apologetic look as I went past and I just grinned and shrugged my shoulders and thought no more of it, but now that I've got home, I thought I'd check to see what the situation actually is.

 

[PaulSB]

You have priority. We have quite a few of these in my area.

 

[steveindenmark]

You do have the right of way. But if you can both get through safely. That would be ok with me.

 

[ianrauk]

You do have priority and in your situation I would have taken the lane, simple as that. I wouldn't have given any one the chance to squeeze through.

 

[vickster]

Around here those pinch points usually have a space for a bike to pass through on the outside of the bollard...if not blocked by a parked car obvs

 

[Pale Rider]

I think for this purpose a bicycle is a vehicle, albeit not a mechanically propelled one.

The driver should have given way, and would certainly have been on very dodgy ground had there been a collision.

 

[Deleted member 1258]

We've got quite a lot of those round here, unfortunately a lot of drivers don't understand the signage and they can be a pain both in the car and on the bike, a lot of them have the lane on the left for bikes but its usually that full of debris its unusable.

 

[Drago]

They've removed most of the pinch points round here after they turned a speeding motorist problem into a dead motorist problem.
A narrow bridge though is tricky. By rights there should be lights. You had priority, but some motorists think cyclists don't exist and can take flight/disappear into the ground at whom to allow motorists to pass. Sometimes I've been tempted to let one have me off the bike just so I can screw them over it, but the risk of it going a bit wrong is too great.

 

[twentysix by twentyfive]

Sometimes I've been tempted to let one have me off the bike just so I can screw them over it, but the risk of it going a bit wrong is too great.

You need super powers. I've put those on my Xmas pressie list for the same reason as you.

 

[steverob]

Well if you were interested in the actual bridge, here's Street View: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.9...4!1sHaISrhnf7hBJkZdFLIvCBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As you can see, it doesn't actually narrow all that much, it's just that it's probably too tight for two cars simulatenously. While I'm happy that I had priority, I just wasn't sure legally where the other guy stood - is it that he HAS to give way or would (theoretically) face the full force of the law, or just that he SHOULD give way, e.g. you can get away with being a bit of an impatient idiot as long you don't hit anyone.

I suppose I could just as easily put it the other way round - if I approached a similar pinch point from the opposite side, but felt that there was room for a bike and a car to pass safely (and assuming there was no bollard/island protected side path as mentioned by Vickster above), would I be legally allowed to just pass through? I probably never would, because I'm ultra cautious of putting myself in any danger (some might say too cautious sometimes, but that's another discussion!) but it's interesting to see what the law says and compare it to what actually happens sometimes.

 

[vickster]

Well if you were interested in the actual bridge, here's Street View: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.9...4!1sHaISrhnf7hBJkZdFLIvCBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As you can see, it doesn't actually narrow all that much, it's just that it's probably too tight for two cars simulatenously. While I'm happy that I had priority, I just wasn't sure legally where the other guy stood - is it that he HAS to give way or would (theoretically) face the full force of the law, or just that he SHOULD give way, e.g. you can get away with being a bit of an impatient idiot as long you don't hit anyone.

I suppose I could just as easily put it the other way round - if I approached a similar pinch point from the opposite side, but felt that there was room for a bike and a car to pass safely (and assuming there was no bollard/island protected side path as mentioned by Vickster above), would I be legally allowed to just pass through? I probably never would, because I'm ultra cautious of putting myself in any danger (some might say too cautious sometimes, but that's another discussion!) but it's interesting to see what the law says and compare it to what actually happens sometimes.

What does the Highway Code say? Must vs should for example?

 

[rogerzilla]

I think for this purpose a bicycle is a vehicle, albeit not a mechanically propelled one.

The driver should have given way, and would certainly have been on very dodgy ground had there been a collision.

Doesn't help if you're a dead hood ornament* by then. As with all road cycling, it's about assuming everyone is out to kill you, and not giving them the opportunity. So eye contact, have an escape option, yield to the larger vehicle if necessary.

*I'm not American but we don't have an equivalent term

 

[roubaixtuesday]

I've one of these on my commute. It's possible for bike and car to pass but far too narrow to feel safe.

Motorist behaviour varies from extremely helpful & polite to "acccelerate hard at the lycra lout to force him off the road".

I always take the lane, and make a point of giving a thumbs up to every well-behaved motorist.

 

[Globalti]

It doesnt matter whether you're on a bike, a horse or in a tin box - you're the road user with priority. Take the lane, make eye contact, move from side to side across the oncoming driver's field of vision and assert your right. But be prepared to need to avoid the oncoming car if the driver is asleep, texting, blinded by low sun or just an idiot with a driving licence they bought from a fixer.

 

[alicat]

When you see one of these signs below, is the traffic from the other direction mandated to stop and give way to you, or is it that you've just theoretically got priority, but they can still squeeze through if there's room and they think it's safe?

If you use Street View to see what the traffic from the other direction sees, there is a white circle with a red border saying 'Give way to oncoming vehicles'.

According to another forum, the definition of "give way" is that:

"no vehicle shall proceed ... in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident."

Or, as driving instructors would say, you must not cause the other driver to stop, slow, swerve, scream, swear or s*** him or herself.

I haven't time to check whether this definition is still current: however it does make sense. Incidentally, the other car wasn't obliged to stop (part of your question) but is obliged to give way if there is oncoming traffic i.e. the driver could crawl nearly to a standstill without actually stopping.