Cyclist Blocked on Pedestrian Crossing

[Mr GrimNasty]

popeyewhite said:

jamei303 said:

popeyewhite said:

If, lol. The taxi was 4 away when it entered the crossing and the cyclist 1. Go and have another look.

But all the armchair traffic law experts here have been telling us that to accord precedence means to stop while a pedestrian is on the corssing and that the distance from the pedestrian doesn't come into it.

I was addressing the comment that the pedestrian 'wasn't bothered' about the taxi, when in reality he simply didn't notice it because it was on his blindside, and further away. But I always understood no vehicle was to enter the crossing while there were pedestrians present.

I really don't understand why people can't get this.

No one was on the crossing when the Taxi went over - the peds were in the refuge (each half is a separate crossing) - the peds wait until it is safe.

The crossing was not clear when the cyclist entered and it was dangerously/intimidatingly close to the closest pedestrian - less than one step away.

[jamei303]

Mr GrimNasty said:

popeyewhite said:

jamei303 said:

popeyewhite said:

If, lol. The taxi was 4 away when it entered the crossing and the cyclist 1. Go and have another look.

But all the armchair traffic law experts here have been telling us that to accord precedence means to stop while a pedestrian is on the corssing and that the distance from the pedestrian doesn't come into it.

I was addressing the comment that the pedestrian 'wasn't bothered' about the taxi, when in reality he simply didn't notice it because it was on his blindside, and further away. But I always understood no vehicle was to enter the crossing while there were pedestrians present.

I really don't understand why people can't get this.

No one was on the crossing when the Taxi went over - the peds were in the refuge (each half is a separate crossing) - the peds wait until it is safe.

The crossing was not clear when the cyclist entered and it was dangerously/intimidatingly close to the closest pedestrian - less than one step away.

"Entering the crossing" means crossing the dashed line before the zebra stripes, not going over the zebra stripes.

Both the taxi and the cyclist cross the dashed line while people are on the crossing, but it seems only one of them is in the wrong.

[cossy400]

Pedal biker is an idiot!!

They carnt have it all ways "we want this much space when you over take etc"

Fair play to the bloke for making a point,

Its about time they had some rules to stick to, and some insurances seeing as now its like half the planet wants to ride to work and back.


On a side note thou, that idiot that's wants to ban trucks, as a driver of one I really hope he succeeds as we all hate driving in to London.

[BoRED S2upid]

Can't believe anyone is defending the cyclist in this one well done to the pedestrian for making the point. Cyclist is no different to a motorbike the rules of the Highway Code apply to both.

[Hugo a Gogo]

CaptainMorgan said:

Hugo a Gogo said:

taxi crosses the line without stopping here in first pic
bike crosses line in second pic
bike is slightly closer, but has more room to go round behind the bloke

(to repeat, the cyclist is still in the wrong)

I think they're talking about the other side of the road with the same guy that stopped the bike?

Yes. I'm talking about the taxi on the other side of the road. That's the same bloke in front of it

[Rich_W]

Petrolhead_Rich said:

Zero sympathy for the cyclist, sadly there are more and more cyclists who are overly aggressive and totally ignore all traffic signs and laws.

Do you actually drive a car? Tell me the general driving of cars standard isn't falling through the floor currently.

vz-r_dave said:

Cyclists in general are impatient morons there is no doubt about it, they run lights, get in the way and in general have a massive chip on their shoulder to both cars and pedestrians.

Change Cyclists to "car drivers"

And as ever. Change cyclist to "dhead on a bike"

Still applies. As for the getting in the way line. Really? I often sit in stop start traffic on my commute home. It take me around 1h20ish to drive 15 miles. I aint stuck behind cyclists for most of that, (but I do see thousands commuting every day) but traffic lights and every other div like me in their metal box in a long line of cars not moving with their engines running

cossy400 said:

Pedal biker is an idiot!!

Yep

cossy400 said:

They carnt have it all ways "we want this much space when you over take etc"

Stand on the edge. Like inside the yellow line. a train platform facing away from the direction of travel. Put on some ear defenders so youre hearing is reduced. Now wait for the express, not stopping, train to come through at 70mph. Try not jumping. Even though you KNOW you wont get hit as the train wont deviate from the line.

Same thing for a bike when "close passed" only cyclist MAY deviate slightly as there's a sodding great pothole in the gutter. Which if they hit will make them crash. So natural reaction is to ride around that. Just like when approaching a parked car they WILL move out further into the carriageway and not just stop and give way to oh so superior car drivers who seem surprised at this fact

Its very easy to give a cyclist room when passing. It's maybe 10 seconds of slowing to find a sensible place. Unless of course you are a ste driver. In which case you'll be stuck for ages. But still no longer than you spend sitting at traffic lights on your way home. Meh

cossy400 said:

Its about time they had some rules to stick to, and some insurances seeing as now its like half the planet wants to ride to work and back.

Insurance, as our younger members will testify is all about how much potential damage you could cause. So 17yos premiums are loaded towards them hitting a LaFerrari. Or worse hitting and putting someone in a wheelchair for life. I presume you'd like insurance for people running on the pavements as well. Since its closer to getting hit by a cyclist that getting hit by any car. And just think, if all those people are put off cycling. They'll all get back in their cars and the traffic will increase. Great. Really slow down those impatient road hogging lorry drivers.


Anyway. What I always like is how some anti cyclist poster always says "cant believe people are defending the cyclist" When I don't see anybody saying cyclist should have ridden through the crossing. He shouldn't and if anything that vid kinds of shows the majority of cyclists DO stop at ped crossings. Which kinda ruins the vocal minority on this thread point

[Mave]

popeyewhite said:

Mave said:

The pedestrian would have been just over 2 zebra crossing stripes away if he'd carried on walking.

If, lol. The taxi was 4 away when it entered the crossing and the cyclist 1. Go and have another look.

Yes. "If". Because "if" he had done the same as he did when the taxi passed him, "if" he had done what most people do on a crossing, the distances would be the same.

Stop the video at 4s, no way is that 4 stripes between them. The taxis wheel is partially on one white stripe, the pedestrian is in the process of lifting his foot from the next white one over. And yes the cyclist was at about 1 when he entered the crossing, but the pedestrian was at the far side, not the same side like with taxi. Look at the speed the bloke was walking. He would have been on or beyond the white stripe before the cyclist got to him.

[EazyDuz]

riveting video

[sherman]

Cyclist was at fault

He was going too fast as he could not stop in the distance he could see to be clear as he crashed into the pedestrian.

The pedestrian shuld not of barged into the cyclist but whos to say he didnt sudenly realise he left his phone on the desk back at the office.

[DoubleD]

Hugo a Gogo said:

taxi crosses the line without stopping here in first pic
bike crosses line in second pic
bike is slightly closer, but has more room to go round behind the bloke

(to repeat, the cyclist is still in the wrong)

[the pips]

First of all the taxi had a perfectly clear view of the crossing and could see that it was safe to proceed. I bet most of us that drive in town would do exactly the same.
The cyclist couldn't possibly have had a clear view of the crossing, he didn't slow down and was relying on everyone staying out of his way. Unfortunately for him, the pedestrian didn't! What if he had seen the cyclist bearing down on him and stepped back? Not all pedestrian actions are predictable!
Do I think the cyclist was in the wrong? Absolutely!
Did I think the pedestrian was out of order. No I don't, I wish I had the strength of character to remonstrate with a thoughtless road-user.

[durbster]

DoubleD said:

[ghiblicup]

durbster said:

DoubleD said:

Why Don't We Do It In The Road

[corozin]

The cyclist was riding like a complete dick and frankly got everything he deserved. If only more pedestrians would challenge these people when they ride like that.

[popeyewhite]

jamei303 said:

"Entering the crossing" means crossing the dashed line before the zebra stripes, not going over the zebra stripes.

Both the taxi and the cyclist cross the dashed line while people are on the crossing, but it seems only one of them is in the wrong.

They're both wrong. Only one nearly wipes out a pedestrian though. Kudos to the poster who suggests the pedestrian should be done for assault - an interesting interpretation of the events

[s3fella]

caelite said:

Honestly I dont see a problem with this, There was ample room for him to go through, it is my understanding that on zebra crossing pedestrians have right of way and traffic must stop and allow them to pass, there was not a pedestrian in his way (until he stopped and walked backwards into him).

In my view this would be like driving up to a yield sign, going with no traffic on the junction when suddenly the traffic that has just gone past then stops and reverses into your path. Its not exactly the same as driving through a pedestrian crossing with a lighted system for road traffic.

Edited by caelite on Friday 30th September 15:32

Are you serious...? There's someone crossing from the other side toward him, what if he was to break into a trot to cross quicker? Cyclists, like other road users, should stop for pedestrians on zebra crossings. And I am pretty sure that no vehicle should even enter the zebra crossing while someone is still on it, even if they have crossed that vehicle's path. The cyclist is taking the piss and I think the ped is right to stand up to him.

[nabster]

The taxi driver is in the wrong. He should've waited until the crossing was clear but of course, he knew that he'd be there for another 30 seconds at least if he did that. And that's not the London way.

That particular cyclist in the wrong too. Why he didn't think that the other cyclists have all stopped therefore I maybe ought to approach the crossing with caution and be ready to stop before I reach it is beyond me.

Similar stuff happens at our local zebra crossing which I use at least four times a day during the week. But whilst I've never had a cyclist or motorcyclist not stop (it's at the top of a hill so most cyclists aren't going fast, which helps), I get at least 2 motor vehicle drivers a week not stopping, occasionally when I've been waiting with one or both of my children for 10 seconds.

[shost]

nabster said:

The taxi driver is in the wrong. He should've waited until the crossing was clear but of course, he knew that he'd be there for another 30 seconds at least if he did that. And that's not the London way.

That particular cyclist in the wrong too. Why he didn't think that the other cyclists have all stopped therefore I maybe ought to approach the crossing with caution and be ready to stop before I reach it is beyond me.

Similar stuff happens at our local zebra crossing which I use at least four times a day during the week. But whilst I've never had a cyclist or motorcyclist not stop (it's at the top of a hill so most cyclists aren't going fast, which helps), I get at least 2 motor vehicle drivers a week not stopping, occasionally when I've been waiting with one or both of my children for 10 seconds.

Exactly this. Posted on the dash cam thread I couldn't believe it was still being argued.

In order of wrong:

Bike 100% - too fast, too close.
Taxi 50% - crossed dotted line a little early but no one else approaching crossing on his side and pedestrian was off crossing entirely by time he entered zebra area. Naughty but not as offensive.
Pedestrian - 0% who is to say he hasn't been hit by a cyclist previously. Totally fair to stop and confront the cyclist.

Madness that people on here think it's reasonable to enter zebra and pass that close to people crossing as they are apparently still giving "precident".

[Pothole]

caelite said:

Honestly I dont see a problem with this, There was ample room for him to go through, it is my understanding that on zebra crossing pedestrians have right of way and traffic must stop and allow them to pass, there was not a pedestrian in his way (until he stopped and walked backwards into him).

In my view this would be like driving up to a yield sign, going with no traffic on the junction when suddenly the traffic that has just gone past then stops and reverses into your path. Its not exactly the same as driving through a pedestrian crossing with a lighted system for road traffic.

Edited by caelite on Friday 30th September 15:32

YOU ARE WRONG.

Highway Code said:

195
Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing

look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
allow more time for stopping on wet or icy roads
do not wave or use your horn to invite pedestrians across; this could be dangerous if another vehicle is approaching
be aware of pedestrians approaching from the side of the crossing

The bloke on the left had moved onto the crossing, therefore the cyclist should have waited.

Edited by Pothole on Saturday 1st October 22:56

[jamei303]

Pothole said:

The bloke on the left had moved onto the crossing, therefore the cyclist should have waited.

Edited by Pothole on Saturday 1st October 22:56

Where does the Highway Code or the law say to "wait"?