Priority Question
Discussion
Came across a situation yesterday evening which had me wondering who (if anyone) had priority.
Driving down a slight hill, gentle left hand bend. Reasonably wide single carriageway, 30mph limit, long white dashes.
Car parked on 'my' side of the road ahead. Leaving a safe gap would involve marginally crossing white line.
Bicycle coming the other way, moving quite slowly due to the hill. Car behind looking to overtake, a safe gap would require the car to marginally cross the white line.
Clearly not room for both maneuvers to happen simultaneously so, with no obvious priority, we both ended up waiting a few seconds for the cyclist to progress so there was space to complete our retrospective overtakes.
However, one of us could have safely completed the maneuver with the other waiting.
Did either car actually have any priority over the other? From vague memories of living in a hilly area with single track roads / passing places, I recall the car coming up the hill has priority in some circumstances - would that be a factor?
Driving down a slight hill, gentle left hand bend. Reasonably wide single carriageway, 30mph limit, long white dashes.
Car parked on 'my' side of the road ahead. Leaving a safe gap would involve marginally crossing white line.
Bicycle coming the other way, moving quite slowly due to the hill. Car behind looking to overtake, a safe gap would require the car to marginally cross the white line.
Clearly not room for both maneuvers to happen simultaneously so, with no obvious priority, we both ended up waiting a few seconds for the cyclist to progress so there was space to complete our retrospective overtakes.
However, one of us could have safely completed the maneuver with the other waiting.
Did either car actually have any priority over the other? From vague memories of living in a hilly area with single track roads / passing places, I recall the car coming up the hill has priority in some circumstances - would that be a factor?
As ever the rule is, irrespective of whatever the Highway Code or any other book says, priority can only be given not taken. In this case , neither of you could complete the manoeuvre without the other road user ceding priority. There might be a slight argument for you giving way because it's easier to restart on a downhill than an uphill, but if it were me, I'd give way , stroke my own personal ego for being a good chap and making the world a nicer place and spend the extra few seconds gained whilst stationary thinking about sex because that's what the feminists tell us we do...
trevt said:
Doesn't the highway code recommend giving way to vehicles coming uphill?
I think that advice is as old as the stopping distances and comes from a time when even cars could struggle with a hill start. It is probably equally valid that vehicles going uphill can stop easier than ones going downhill so best to give way to the downhill one.
As stated earlier have the discussion with the other driver and play safe if necessary.
Sorry guys but I disagree with the "communicate with the other driver" stuff, if the stationary vehicle is on your side it is up to you to give way, this is a personal bugbear of mine and seems to be something alien to younger drivers around here certainly, yet another indicator of the fall in driving standards...imo obviously
jaf01uk said:
Sorry guys but I disagree with the "communicate with the other driver" stuff, if the stationary vehicle is on your side it is up to you to give way, this is a personal bugbear of mine and seems to be something alien to younger drivers around here certainly, yet another indicator of the fall in driving standards...imo obviously
I think most of us would agree (not being young drivers from your neck of the woods 
) that when overtaking we wait until it's safe to do so; whether the obstruction we are overtaking is moving or not. Don't forget the oncoming vehicle was also needing to move out to overtake.btw; I think the op & the other driver dealt with the situation just fine; can't see what all the fuss is about.
jaf01uk said:
Sorry guys but I disagree with the "communicate with the other driver" stuff, if the stationary vehicle is on your side it is up to you to give way, this is a personal bugbear of mine and seems to be something alien to younger drivers around here certainly, yet another indicator of the fall in driving standards...imo obviously
I know what you're saying but I'm not sure that's the issue the OP was asking about. I think we must be talking about a road that's wide enough to pass a parked car and still leave room for an oncomer under normal circumstances (and would be wide enough for the oncomer to pass the cyclist without coming into conflict with the OP if the parked car weren't there). As I read it, it's only because the parked car and cyclist coincided that the potential for conflict (and therefore the OP's question) arose.When i learnt to drive, back when you could do over 100 mph and not get nicked, the general concensus was whoever had the obstruction gave way, except on hills when the obstruction was on the uphill side and the downhill driver gave way, i use this today esp if it is a rather lage vehicle coming up hill, he doesnt have to do a hill start, and you just roll downhill to get going again, but as other posters have said, that convention is being used less and less, even on flat roads.When i did my driving course at Crewe, you were advised to 'command the road' in such situations and just position yourself to 'convince' the guy with the obstruction he had 3 options
1) carry on and hit you
2) swerve to avoid you and hit the obstruction
3) Stop
However i have noticed the growing habit of drivers appearing to have the eyes of a dead cod, when the obstruction is on their side, sort of a glazed straight ahead look if you get my drift.
Whilst i still drive by that convention, my foot is hovering over the brake 'just in case'
1) carry on and hit you
2) swerve to avoid you and hit the obstruction
3) Stop
However i have noticed the growing habit of drivers appearing to have the eyes of a dead cod, when the obstruction is on their side, sort of a glazed straight ahead look if you get my drift.
Whilst i still drive by that convention, my foot is hovering over the brake 'just in case'
Lots of sense there silverfoxcc. I guess I'm of the same generation in that I would always give way if the obstruction is on my side of the road and certainly where the other guy is travelling up hill. However many of today's drivers have never been taught such niceities.
My view of the approach to a 50/50 situation with cars parked on both sides of a reasonably wide road is, with an early view of the approach to the pinch point, to position my vehicle such that I am on a parallel course with those vehicles parked on my side of the road. I am "showing" the oncoming traffic where I want to be, but, I have sufficient road space availabe to me to modify my plan if the opposing drivers are not going to react and modify their position so as we both may proceed through the restriction quite safely. By the way, I am continually reasessing my position and prepared to stop if necessary for those drivers who are totally oblivious to the situation. It works for me.
My view of the approach to a 50/50 situation with cars parked on both sides of a reasonably wide road is, with an early view of the approach to the pinch point, to position my vehicle such that I am on a parallel course with those vehicles parked on my side of the road. I am "showing" the oncoming traffic where I want to be, but, I have sufficient road space availabe to me to modify my plan if the opposing drivers are not going to react and modify their position so as we both may proceed through the restriction quite safely. By the way, I am continually reasessing my position and prepared to stop if necessary for those drivers who are totally oblivious to the situation. It works for me.
romeogolf said:
If the stationary car is on your side of the road, then the on-coming traffic has right of way and you should slow/stop and wait. The bicycle was not an obstruction per se as he was still moving, albeit slightly slower.
Thanks for that, next time I need to move out to overtake a cyclist I won't concern myself about any oncoming vehicles potentially moving out to pass a parked car because some bloke on the internet said it was my right of way 
7mike said:
romeogolf said:
If the stationary car is on your side of the road, then the on-coming traffic has right of way and you should slow/stop and wait. The bicycle was not an obstruction per se as he was still moving, albeit slightly slower.
Thanks for that, next time I need to move out to overtake a cyclist I won't concern myself about any oncoming vehicles potentially moving out to pass a parked car because some bloke on the internet said it was my right of way He didn't say you had a right to cross the centre line.
He didn't say you didn't need to worry about other vehicles potentially not respecting your right of way.
Mave said:
He didn't say that though did he?
He didn't say you had a right to cross the centre line.
He didn't say you didn't need to worry about other vehicles potentially not respecting your right of way.
I'll stick to using my judgment thanks and leave this obsession with who has right away to the internet experts.He didn't say you had a right to cross the centre line.
He didn't say you didn't need to worry about other vehicles potentially not respecting your right of way.
Mave said:
7mike said:
romeogolf said:
If the stationary car is on your side of the road, then the on-coming traffic has right of way and you should slow/stop and wait. The bicycle was not an obstruction per se as he was still moving, albeit slightly slower.
Thanks for that, next time I need to move out to overtake a cyclist I won't concern myself about any oncoming vehicles potentially moving out to pass a parked car because some bloke on the internet said it was my right of way romeogolf said:
If the stationary car is on your side of the road, then the on-coming traffic has right of way and you should slow/stop and wait. The bicycle was not an obstruction per se as he was still moving, albeit slightly slower.
By your reasoning if the bicycle is not an obstruction, then the oncoming car has no cause to overtake it and therefore there is plenty of room for the OP to pass the parked car while the oncoming car trundles along slowly behind the bicycle. 
I reckon what happened is about right - both drivers note potential hazard and not knowing what the other car is about to do, act to avoid it.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff