What's the legal situation here?

[classic33]

Slight downhill into Leeds. The yellow road markings is a 90 foot bus stop box, on the side the POB was on. Bus stop visible after the junction, in the earlier pictures.

 

[snailracer]

From what I have read about cases involving motorcycles, fault would have been assigned 50:50. If the cyclist was in a marked bike lane than extended across the junction (which is rare) then the taxi would have been 100% at fault because that would have been a clear criminal offence on the taxi's part.

 

[classic33]

Given the bus stop, I'd be careful near it.

 

[PK99]

There is a difference between filtering and undertaking at speed.

Filtering on the left i do at little more that walking pace, giving myself plenty of time to stop in the distance i can see to be clear.
At a junction, I slow further, especially if I see a driver has left a gap across the head of the junction.
If I want more speed, i overtake the stationary line on the right, giving myself plenty of space - but my speed is still far less than if i had a clear road.

 

[sidevalve]

Seems a bit of a no win situation. The cyclist was undertaking stationary traffic and although I agree the OP had restricted vision and should have been carefull so did the cyclist BOTH should have been able to stop in the distance they could SEE and I repeat that bit, see, to be clear. Just to assume that the traffic had stopped for some odd reason that wouldn't affect him was just stupid riding.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Didn't @gaz have this very scenario a while back when he went over the bonnet of a car that turned right through a gap in stationary traffic? Maybe he could chime in here because I'm fairly sure the matter was settled in his favour and the driver was fined.

GC

 

[Origamist]

Didn't @gaz have this very scenario a while back when he went over the bonnet of a car that turned right through a gap in stationary traffic? Maybe he could chime in here because I'm fairly sure the matter was settled in his favour and the driver was fined.

GC

IIRC, Gaz was hit in similar circs, but he was in a bus lane at the time. The driver was found guilty. Gaz will hopefully clarify the details.

 

[PK99]

Didn't @gaz have this very scenario a while back when he went over the bonnet of a car that turned right through a gap in stationary traffic? Maybe he could chime in here because I'm fairly sure the matter was settled in his favour and the driver was fined.

GC

My smidsy. 3 years ago, was very similar.

I was taken out at this junction:



I came from bottom left on the inside of the line of traffic (a bike lane feeds into that position, otherwise i would have been on the outside)

Car in queue for level crossing, does U/3point turn, and then straight across the Yellow hatched box, which I am halfway across.

Initially informed that no prosecution, i complained and they prosecuted.

Driver defended himself in court, prosecuting council was a hopeless drip who seemed to have no understanding of the situation.

Outcome: Case dismissed.

But his insurance company had already paid out £10kplus for bike, medical/physio expenses and pain/suffering.

 

[Cyclopathic]

It is probably unwise to filter on the left hand side of a high sided vehicle. Also it is unwise to cut across traffic without being able to see what is on the other side of a vehicle. Doing either should require great care in execution and a speed that allows either to stop before colliding.

The driver could perhaps wait for the next vehicle to let them through in the hope it is a regular car and the cyclist should be aware of the risks of filtering on the left past lorries and vans. Pedestrians will also often walk between cars stopped in a queue so you should be ready for that.

 

[davefb]

211..

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/204-225-road-users-requiring-extra-care

"When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing."

seriously, if you can't see, then you can't see it's clear, you need to be looking not FOR someone, but to be sure it's safe... and one would hope the cyclist would be thinking the same.......

 

[gaz]

Didn't @gaz have this very scenario a while back when he went over the bonnet of a car that turned right through a gap in stationary traffic? Maybe he could chime in here because I'm fairly sure the matter was settled in his favour and the driver was fined.

GC

IIRC, Gaz was hit in similar circs, but he was in a bus lane at the time. The driver was found guilty. Gaz will hopefully clarify the details.

Similar scenario to above but as origamist points out I was in a bus lane so there are different legal standings. The driver in my case was found to be 100% at fault in the eyes of the law.

I think with regards to the situation outlined above, it would probably be a split between the two, I doubt there would be a legal case against the driver.
Filtering at speed past a junction with stationary traffic and a large vehicle blocking your view, not a good idea.

 

[wait4me]

DBrown67 must regret asking this!
With page after page saying he for varying reasons was in the wrong. eg "he shouldn't have gone forward if he couldn't see"
He was going forward and he could see forward!!!
All those who argue for the tw*t on the bike cyclist please answer this question
If the cyclist and taxi were roll reversed and there was a lane inside the stationary traffic for the taxi to drive along who would you blame then?
We should all defend the wronged cyclists but some would defend a mugger if he went by bike

 

[glasgowcyclist]

All those who argue for the tw*t on the bike cyclist please answer this question
If the cyclist and taxi were roll reversed and there was a lane inside the stationary traffic for the taxi to drive along who would you blame then?

A. The cyclist.

Next question.


GC

 

[Origamist]

A. The cyclist.

Next question.


O

 

[Spinney]

DBrown67 must regret asking this!
With page after page saying he for varying reasons was in the wrong. eg "he shouldn't have gone forward if he couldn't see"
He was going forward and he could see forward!!!
All those who argue for the tw*t on the bike cyclist please answer this question
If the cyclist and taxi were roll reversed and there was a lane inside the stationary traffic for the taxi to drive along who would you blame then?
We should all defend the wronged cyclists but some would defend a mugger if he went by bike

Actually many people have said the cyclist was unwise/not taking enough care etc.
Some have said that it would probably be 50:50 if there had been an accident.
Some (including me) have said that ideally he should not have gone if he could not see sideways (i.e. where the cyclist was coming from), but it is understandable why he did and many of us would have done the same.
Many approved of his slow inching out, which was what allowed him to avoid hitting the cyclist.

A car pulling out of a junction onto a main road can see forwards. What kills cyclists is that when they pull out in front of a cyclist they have not looked sideways first. So to say that he was OK because he could see forwards is nonsense.