Cycling Mikey passing opposing Van video
Discussion
Broke this out of the DCW thread for anyone interested in how to avoid a fine
The rules are quite clear about giving cyclists a safe space. We've now had a number of videos that have showed a lack of safe space and have resulted in conviction.
The confusion and lack of understanding should have gone by now.Obviously that was a safe space though (otherwise the video would be different ).
Many cyclists and cars (both are vehicles) would assume it is safe and continue without issue.
If either had thought there wasnt enough space theyd have either stopped or pulled into one of the gaps
In slowmo - arent the van tyres ever so slightly pointing towards the parked cars
Because it's at least in rule 163
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using...
How else do you think it was referred to
How's about using google or something if you dont know the answer
FWIW the 'behave yourself' is pretty much on point. The law isn't binary, it comes down to the opinion of a court as to what constitutes dangerous driving / what's expected of a competent driver / what's reasonable consideration. Those standards can change over time, as the highway code advice changes.
Whatever, it's not what this thread's about.
FWIW I doubt the van driver would have been reported but for the swerve. If he'd slowed and / or pulled in he would have lost a couple of seconds but definitely saved 6 points. That's the trouble though.
You move out to clear one car before the cyclist and move back again and suddenly youre up before the beak and the DCW says 'you swerved at me' or 'the Highway Code says 1.5 metres'.
Surely the only way to be certain of avoiding the fine is to stop if theres a chance youre within 1.5metres of a bike - which is probably the intention.
Feel free to add any other bits, if there's more to discuss
Driver101 said:
saaby93 said:
What about some Cycling Mikey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Zl_YRZyw4
Neither decided they needed to pull into one of the gaps as there was plenty of room to pass - as demonstrated by the video.
There will be another long discussion on this cycling incident like the last times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Zl_YRZyw4
Neither decided they needed to pull into one of the gaps as there was plenty of room to pass - as demonstrated by the video.
The rules are quite clear about giving cyclists a safe space. We've now had a number of videos that have showed a lack of safe space and have resulted in conviction.
The confusion and lack of understanding should have gone by now.
Many cyclists and cars (both are vehicles) would assume it is safe and continue without issue.
If either had thought there wasnt enough space theyd have either stopped or pulled into one of the gaps
In slowmo - arent the van tyres ever so slightly pointing towards the parked cars
gazza285 said:
saaby93 said:
Hence why you have to assume the 1.5metres holds - otherwise someone sends in a bit of dashcam
Didnt someone post up where the 1.5 metres was referred to, to show it was only for passing and not for oncoming
There is no law that stipulates 1.5 metres, whichever way you are traveling, so how can it have been referred to?Didnt someone post up where the 1.5 metres was referred to, to show it was only for passing and not for oncoming
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using...
How else do you think it was referred to
How's about using google or something if you dont know the answer
monthou said:
For the love of God will saaby or havoc start a thread about the 1.5m imaginary law?
Donemonthou said:
havoc said:
Don't lump me in with him.
I'm actually trying to work out what I do/don't need to do here (because potentially veering AT the cyclist aside, I'm not entirely sure what that van did wrong)...
...and all I'm getting is vague "behave yourself" pronouncements from the start-an-argument brigade and snapshots of media/social media posts from the other side.
Fair enough. I'm actually trying to work out what I do/don't need to do here (because potentially veering AT the cyclist aside, I'm not entirely sure what that van did wrong)...
...and all I'm getting is vague "behave yourself" pronouncements from the start-an-argument brigade and snapshots of media/social media posts from the other side.
FWIW the 'behave yourself' is pretty much on point. The law isn't binary, it comes down to the opinion of a court as to what constitutes dangerous driving / what's expected of a competent driver / what's reasonable consideration. Those standards can change over time, as the highway code advice changes.
Whatever, it's not what this thread's about.
FWIW I doubt the van driver would have been reported but for the swerve. If he'd slowed and / or pulled in he would have lost a couple of seconds but definitely saved 6 points.
You move out to clear one car before the cyclist and move back again and suddenly youre up before the beak and the DCW says 'you swerved at me' or 'the Highway Code says 1.5 metres'.
Surely the only way to be certain of avoiding the fine is to stop if theres a chance youre within 1.5metres of a bike - which is probably the intention.
Feel free to add any other bits, if there's more to discuss
Edited by saaby93 on Sunday 5th June 23:47
saaby93 said:
What about some Cycling Mikey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Zl_YRZyw4
Neither decided they needed to pull into one of the gaps as there was plenty of room to pass - as demonstrated by the video.
I do idly wonder how many hours Mikey pedalled around trying to catch someone. His legs must be tired.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Zl_YRZyw4
Neither decided they needed to pull into one of the gaps as there was plenty of room to pass - as demonstrated by the video.
mattyprice4004 said:
shtu said:
I do idly wonder how many hours Mikey pedalled around trying to catch someone. His legs must be tired.
I agree - most of his videos seem to be actively looking for problems! I wonder if there is a common theme that links them all.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff