Cyclist "doored" by car passenger - input and advice please!
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
You come to a traffic light controlled junction where you can turn right or go straight on. You are going straight on the car in front is turning right. The car in front positions themselves to the right giving you enough space to move forward and go through the junction. As you are passing the car turning right the passenger door opens at the last minute and you hit it. Is it your fault of the passenger in the car in front?stuart313 said:
Devil2575 said:
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
You come to a traffic light controlled junction where you can turn right or go straight on. You are going straight on the car in front is turning right. The car in front positions themselves to the right giving you enough space to move forward and go through the junction. As you are passing the car turning right the passenger door opens at the last minute and you hit it. Is it your fault of the passenger in the car in front?If the car was right next to the pavement then no one would be able to pass it so that's a silly point.
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
People in cars can kill people on bikes. It's unlikely to happen the other way round, is it?Anyway, an update - passenger has been off work for over a week now (signed off with stress, apparently). OH says the cyclist wasn't going too fast as he was approaching the junction where he would hav stopped anyway. It's an industrial estate with wide enough roads to permit filtering past queuing cars - the cyclist was on the left as the queue of cars was positioned to the right of the lane as they were all turning right. I can't say anything regarding the cyclist and insurance as the situation is still ongoing.
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
When you walk through the supermarket car park, how close are you happy to get to a parked car? Is that how close you'd be happy to be passed by a car if you have to walk in the road?gazza285 said:
Diesel Focus, Daily Mail reading and no sleep. Is this the cause, or just the symptoms of complete idiocy?
So after your excellent and time consuming detective work, what is wrong with 1-a ford focus and 2-the daily mail, don't tell me its all lies and nothing they printed today actually happened, Wimbledon-never f
king heard of it.And for your information I get plenty of sleep, If Cagney or Lacey wake me up I just stay in bed a bit longer, because I can.
otolith said:
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
When you walk through the supermarket car park, how close are you happy to get to a parked car? Is that how close you'd be happy to be passed by a car if you have to walk in the road?stuart313 said:
gazza285 said:
Diesel Focus, Daily Mail reading and no sleep. Is this the cause, or just the symptoms of complete idiocy?
So after your excellent and time consuming detective work, what is wrong with 1-a ford focus and 2-the daily mail, don't tell me its all lies and nothing they printed today actually happened, Wimbledon-never fking heard of it.And for your information I get plenty of sleep, If Cagney or Lacey wake me up I just stay in bed a bit longer, because I can.
stuart313 said:
otolith said:
That must make it difficult to get in your car, if you won't walk close to the one it's parked next to.
I park at the far end where no one else parks, just like all the petrol heads on here, apart from when they want to make a point of course.otolith said:
stuart313 said:
otolith said:
That must make it difficult to get in your car, if you won't walk close to the one it's parked next to.
I park at the far end where no one else parks, just like all the petrol heads on here, apart from when they want to make a point of course.Didn't mention the French either. How does the tin foil fit round the dibber?
otolith said:
stuart313 said:
otolith said:
That must make it difficult to get in your car, if you won't walk close to the one it's parked next to.
I park at the far end where no one else parks, just like all the petrol heads on here, apart from when they want to make a point of course.stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
Possibly the stupidest, least thought out statement I have ever read on Pistonheads... 
One is surrounded by Lycra/jeans/shorts etc, the other by a metal cage weighing well over a ton!
The consequences of a cyclist knocking a car door/mirror are f
king miniscule compared to being knocked off by some in a car!!!One of my old Army colleagues died in exactly this way - her wing mirror knocked him off, she was doing about 50 (NSL road).
Bellend!
Regardless of fault, as a cyclist I do not favour filtering on the nearside in most circumstances. Drivers do not expect vehicles to be passing them on the nearside and neither do passengers; they should, but this does not assist the cyclist who is lying in the road.
I will pass on the offside wherever sensible to do so. Drivers are most unlikely to get out of their vehicle and offside passengers tend to be cautious about getting out. Even so, I would avoid riding too close and look for odd behaviour such as seatbelts off, drivers/passengers reaching for door handles for whatever reason (coat stuck in door etc). If there are no oncoming vehicles then a cyclist can move well into the other lane. In traffic it is always possible that a driver will suddenly decide they've had enough and go for a U-turn; if there is any sort of turning on the right, even if a small farm track etc, then this needs to be considered even more carefully. The example motorbike case (which I discovered on reading a colleague of mine was a witness to) describes the car driver involved in the accident leaving an abnormal gap from the vehicle in front before his manoeuvre. This behaviour should make the cyclist/motorcyclist think that the driver may be looking to turn around - not, as one motorcyclist witness stated, mean it was safe to quickly accelerate past.
All of these things are about trying to avoid an accident on a bike. The passenger in this case sounds like a real nuisance but you do have to be careful doing this sort of thing on a bike. In most cases the cyclist is much better filtering on the offside and when traffic starts to move at the speed of the cyclist they can join the traffic in the centre of the lane. As the traffic increases its speed then moving over to the nearside allows drivers to get past and most to have noticed the cyclist's presence.
Apologies for the long message but I ride a lot in city traffic and try and look at things from a driver's perspective as, of course, I am a keen driver....
Steve
I will pass on the offside wherever sensible to do so. Drivers are most unlikely to get out of their vehicle and offside passengers tend to be cautious about getting out. Even so, I would avoid riding too close and look for odd behaviour such as seatbelts off, drivers/passengers reaching for door handles for whatever reason (coat stuck in door etc). If there are no oncoming vehicles then a cyclist can move well into the other lane. In traffic it is always possible that a driver will suddenly decide they've had enough and go for a U-turn; if there is any sort of turning on the right, even if a small farm track etc, then this needs to be considered even more carefully. The example motorbike case (which I discovered on reading a colleague of mine was a witness to) describes the car driver involved in the accident leaving an abnormal gap from the vehicle in front before his manoeuvre. This behaviour should make the cyclist/motorcyclist think that the driver may be looking to turn around - not, as one motorcyclist witness stated, mean it was safe to quickly accelerate past.
All of these things are about trying to avoid an accident on a bike. The passenger in this case sounds like a real nuisance but you do have to be careful doing this sort of thing on a bike. In most cases the cyclist is much better filtering on the offside and when traffic starts to move at the speed of the cyclist they can join the traffic in the centre of the lane. As the traffic increases its speed then moving over to the nearside allows drivers to get past and most to have noticed the cyclist's presence.
Apologies for the long message but I ride a lot in city traffic and try and look at things from a driver's perspective as, of course, I am a keen driver....
Steve
stuart313 said:
Another thing, youtube is full of cyclists giving verbals and hand signals to vehicles they consider have passed them too closely, yet when a cyclist passes very close to a car its ok.
Physics.Consider how safe you would consider it if I swung a massive piece of 2x4 close to your head, compared to if I did the same with a chopstick.
The old statement is "a door and more" when passing stationary traffic. Enough room for a door to open, plus a bit of contingency. That's common sense. However, if you *don't* follow those rules and someone doors you, that doesn't make it your fault! It's the fault of the knob who opens the door without looking!
It saddens me that her reaction to (fairly seriously) injuring another human being is to a) leg it and b) complain about how stressed it's made her. Why can't people just have a bit of common fking sense?!
It saddens me that her reaction to (fairly seriously) injuring another human being is to a) leg it and b) complain about how stressed it's made her. Why can't people just have a bit of common f
king sense?!singlecoil said:
I don't think it's common sense that is lacking, so much as an inability to deal with her own shortcomings.
No, I think both are lacking in the passenger in question. Common sense says you look when opening a car door, especially in the situation the OP paints with lots of vehicles of different types and sizes and with them all being conducted by people of differing ages and abilities.That they then tried to wriggle out of it took them to zero sympathy.
That they have now had themselves signed off sick with stress on the hottest week of the year suggests that they are a waste of a good job.
She didn't exactly leg it at the scene - she hid around the corner until my OH and the cyclist had left the scene, then came back to the confused car driver to see if she could continue her lift home after all... I'd hazard the reason she walked off would have been the hairdryer treatment she received from my OH due to standing there and not attempting to assist the injured party (which was what my OH was doing).
Regardless, I suspect she'll never take responsibility for what happened, nor will she suffer any consequences. Such is the way of the world.
Regardless, I suspect she'll never take responsibility for what happened, nor will she suffer any consequences. Such is the way of the world.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff