Witnessed: Very near miss: Silly cyclist at fault?

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

dondare

Über Member
Location
London
After all I've said about it I damn' near did the same thing myself this morning. Got a shout from the passenger of a left-turning van, although this was probably more to warn the driver than me. I had time and room to keep going but with a loud horn blast following me.
I've no idea if the van was signalling as I was actually watching the car in front. He didn't have to emergency stop, just wait until I'd gone by before making the turn. If he'd not waited then I could have easily avoided being hooked as it was all very slow. But still, I really wasn't paying enough attention.
 

Tynan

Veteran
Location
e4
there's a difference between the highway code/law and what's sensible on a bike

the car shouldn't turn left unless it's safe to do so and that's a fact
 

tongue_tied

New Member
Surely overtakes are meant to be on the right? If a car was turning left in front while I was driving, or moving at a reasonable speed, I wouldn't cut through on the inside even if for some reason there was space, why should it be any different on a bike? In both cases the vehicle in front, turning, has priority.

I had a shock the other day, had passed a lone cyclist then came up behind a small group and stayed behind at about 20mph as not safe to overtake, even if it had been they were stuck behind a farm vehicle so would have got me nowhere. Not a particularly wide country road, with some tight spots at bends. I'm always checking my mirrors, very fortunately in this case as I suddenly realised that the lone cyclist had pushed his way into the gap between me and the hedge, couldn't get in front of me as I was behind the group, so he was riding in a space that could have been reduced to virtually nothing if a wide vehicle had come the other way. Seems he thought having half a car length between him and the others instead of a full length was worth the risk of being knocked into the hedge, which seems a rather dangerous attitude considering the number of drivers who don't use their mirror to check that area of the road unless turning (or at all), as they just wouldn't expect anything to be there, especially at that type of speed.

I have had so many idiots nearly knock me off my bike, my former housemate has been knocked off by drivers not looking where they're going, but the situations described in this thread can only exacerbate the anti-cyclist view sadly held by many motorists. Whether on bike or in car, surely people should use good old common sense to decide what is safe and what isn't? It's my opinion that anyone taking their driving test should be made to ride a bike through city traffic as part of it, just to teach them awareness... but sadly there are idiots on both sides, equally indefensible.
 

Tynan

Veteran
Location
e4
Archie_tect said:
Only an idiot passes on the inside of a vehicle indicating left... or passes on the outside of a vehicle turning right.

yes indeed, but the highway code/law still says that the vehicle performing a manouvre has to do it safely

bikes have a tendency to pass things on the left, cycle lanes and all
 

Svendo

Guru
Location
Walsden
Ronaldo said:
Also from rule 163

..."stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left"

OP doesn't mention a cycle lane, so even if you are keeping to the left (secondary position) you are 'in' the same lane as the cars next to you. So this doesn't really apply. The rule quoted further up by RyanW is a far more applicable one. But both are trumped the the rule in Users sig.

Even with a cycle lane it's far from wise to assume cars will check their nearside mirrors or even signal for that matter before turning left, as the OPs story illustrates.

I'm also not sure what people mean by filtering, is it just a convenient way of describing moving through stationary or slow traffic, on whichever side; or is it being used in an attempt to legitimise or justify what is a common but dubiously legal practice (outside of a cycle lane)? I'm sure I've seen footage of motorcyclists being pulled for doing it in traffic jams on motorways on police reality docusoap thingies.

I should say I do filter on the left/undertake albeit slowly and with great care at junctions and never past moving HGVs, and I very rarely center filter as I feel very vulnerable and usually have to trust a car to let me back in to the left when appropriate.
 

dondare

Über Member
Location
London
Filtering, which I would define as passing slow or stationary motor traffic either at the side of or between lanes, is perfectly legal if done with due care and attention.
Ditto weaving, which involves moving across lanes to pass slow or stationary motor traffic.
 

RyanW

The abominable Bikeman
Location
Ashford, Kent
I suppose it raises the issue, is a cycle "lane" a separate lane or simply a protected, or indicated area at the left hand side of the left hand lane.

If that makes sence.

Although having said that i see now many lanes end before and start again after most junctions.

I guess the hashed line does indeed indicate a lane, but then cars parking on them would be effectively blocking an entire lane of a road, for which they are not penalised, imagine if i left my bike locked covering an entire lane. i imagine it would be pretty flat when i got back.
 

Svendo

Guru
Location
Walsden
dondare said:
Filtering, which I would define as passing slow or stationary motor traffic either at the side of or between lanes, is perfectly legal if done with due care and attention.
Ditto weaving, which involves moving across lanes to pass slow or stationary motor traffic.

Thanks, thats what I thought it meant. It seems to be that traffic must be stationery or slow moving or indicating right to allow filtering.
 

Svendo

Guru
Location
Walsden
RyanW said:
I suppose it raises the issue, is a cycle "lane" a separate lane or simply a protected, or indicated area at the left hand side of the left hand lane.

Cycle Lane is a segregated part of the road, either with a dashed line allowing it to be used by other traffic or a solid line making it 'mandatory' (terrible choice of adjective by the powers that be, shoulda been 'exclusive').
Cycle Path is a provision seperate to the main carriage way, lots of varieties, on pavement, totally seperate, shared use etc. and I suppose bolends into bridle paths passable by bicycles. Tow paths are usually a special case, except in London and when a NCR.
Cycling provision, lane or path, doesn't prevent you using the main carriage way except where specifically prohibited.
 

Camgreen

Well-Known Member
Presumably the cyclist can see the car, can see the indicator, but ignores the potential hazard. The OP suggests it's a single lane (leastways doesn't say otherwise) therefore all the more reason for the cyclist to be cautious in this situation. He got it wrong ..... let's hope he learns from his mistake .... might be so lucky next time.
 
Top Bottom