Twitter cyclists v Twitter driver video - who's right?

[boyse7en]

Driver at fault.

Didn't slow down when approaching the cyclist so was too close before he pulled out, the didn't give any where near enough space while trying to overtake.
This is exactly the reason drivers are told to give cyclists plenty of room when passing.

[Cyder]

popeyewhite said:

Cyder said:

RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:

Both. The cyclist shouldn't move offside without looking/warning and the driver approached far too quickly.

This.

Nah

Firstly there is no speed readout shown on the clip to justify such a statement.
Secondly the speed differential between the two appears to me to be roughly 5-10 mph at the most. Camera angle doesn't help. Could be more, could be less. One thing it isn't is "far too quickly".

Cyclist swerved across the road, and had he been knocked off it would have been entirely his fault.

I disagree, the driver left very little space between the end of the pinch point and the start of his move. In my opinion he should have slowed, cleared the lunch point then begun to pull out in a wider manner around the cyclist.

[321boost]

popeyewhite said:

Cyder said:

RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:

Both. The cyclist shouldn't move offside without looking/warning and the driver approached far too quickly.

This.

Nah

Firstly there is no speed readout shown on the clip to justify such a statement.
Secondly the speed differential between the two appears to me to be roughly 5-10 mph at the most. Camera angle doesn't help. Could be more, could be less. One thing it isn't is "far too quickly".

Cyclist swerved across the road, and had he been knocked off it would have been entirely his fault.

This.

[meatballs]

Driver isn't even in the right position to safely overtake if the cyclist didn't swing out as there was a traffic island and he hadn't cleared it. Looks to me like he was looking at the cyclist falling off and completely forgets about the other cyclist until he's right up his chuff.

The wide angle lens of the camera means the car was even closer than it looks when he hit the brakes and swerved.

Edited by meatballs on Monday 8th March 00:05

[anonymous-user]

meatballs said:

Driver isn't even in the right position to safely overtake if the cyclist didn't swing out as there was a traffic island and he hadn't cleared it. Looks to me like he was looking at the cyclist falling off and completely forgets about the other cyclist until he's right up his chuff.

That was my thought, too.

[heebeegeetee]

RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:

Both. The cyclist shouldn't move offside without looking/warning and the driver approached far too quickly.

This is the answer for me. The driver didn't actually need to be anywhere near the cyclist. In his twitter feed the driver complains of having to brake hard, but for me this just confirms that those who brake hard are driving badly. I think there's no need to brake at all, if he'd planned to pass safely after a pinch point.

The cyclist's wobble is more like a weave, he moves out more than should be expected imo.

Both are at fault for their respective indiscretions imo.

[PH User]

RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:

meatballs said:

Driver isn't even in the right position to safely overtake if the cyclist didn't swing out as there was a traffic island and he hadn't cleared it. Looks to me like he was looking at the cyclist falling off and completely forgets about the other cyclist until he's right up his chuff.

That was my thought, too.

So both were looking at the cyclist and neither were properly concentrating

[ruggedscotty]

Advanced driving.... Motorist - closing speed was too fast - never gave the cyclist enough room - remember you are in effect overtaking another vehcile when passing a cyclist - it warrants the same considerations as overtaking anything else.

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

Basically ignore the other cyclist falling off.. This was purely the driver and the cyclist, and the driver got it badly wrong indeed.

[anonymous-user]

ruggedscotty said:

This was purely the driver and the cyclist, and the driver got it badly wrong indeed.

what utter nonsense

[NGee]

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

[NGRhodes]

NGee said:

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

Worth noting that if the driver was following the rules of the highway code he would of given the cyclist sufficient room before not when to allow for these potential hazards.

[NGee]

NGRhodes said:

NGee said:

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

If the driver was following the rules of the highway code he would of given the cyclist sufficient room before not when.

He did give the cyclist sufficient room, otherwise the cyclist would be dead.

[BlackTails]

NGee said:

NGRhodes said:

NGee said:

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

If the driver was following the rules of the highway code he would of given the cyclist sufficient room before not when.

He did give the cyclist sufficient room, otherwise the cyclist would be dead.

"Sufficient room" is not the same as "did not collide with", and a near miss usually results from poor planning.

[NGRhodes]

NGee said:

NGRhodes said:

NGee said:

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

If the driver was following the rules of the highway code he would of given the cyclist sufficient room before not when.

He did give the cyclist sufficient room, otherwise the cyclist would be dead.

My point was that he should of been planning to pass with sufficient room and only when it is safe to (as per the highway code), should not of "swerved into the middle of the road" as you stated.

Edited by NGRhodes on Monday 8th March 10:22

[PH User]

NGRhodes said:

NGee said:

NGRhodes said:

NGee said:

ruggedscotty said:

If the cyclist had hit a pot hole or otherwise fell off his bike how would the driver have coped ?

He would have coped exactly the same way that he did, by driving round the cyclist when the idiot suddenly decided to slam on his brakes and swerved into the middle of the road.
Worth noting that if the driver had not been paying attention or driving too fast the cyclist would be dead now.

If the driver was following the rules of the highway code he would of given the cyclist sufficient room before not when.

He did give the cyclist sufficient room, otherwise the cyclist would be dead.

My point was that he should of been planning to pass with sufficient room (as per the highway code), should not of "swerved into the middle of the road" as you stated.

Neither were perfect though.

[NGee]

BlackTails said:

"Sufficient room" is not the same as "did not collide with", and a near miss usually results from poor planning.

Yes, of course, however in this case there was "Sufficient room" to avoid a collision with a moronic cyclist who definitely suffered from no planning at all.

[Castrol for a knave]

Probably 50/50

Cyclist didn't check before moving out

Driver made no attempt to change speed between cyclist and island pinch point, aside from what happened and just barrelled along.

Winner will be Daily Mail

[untakenname]

monthou said:

10 seconds to 12 seconds he goes from hugging the edge of the road to more or less primary position. Without looking.
That's not a wobble.

Due to the poor quality of the footage you have to play it full screen but at 10 seconds the cyclist does a check and the car is still far behind (he should have signalled though), it looks like it's a 30mph limit and the car is going to quick for the conditions so at fault 80% imo, if he hit the cyclist he would be 100% at fault in the eyes of the law as he was behind.

[monthou]

Several people - myself included - have said that as cyclists / bikers they blame the cyclist. It would be interesting to know how many of those absolving the cyclist of blame are regular cyclists - I would hope the answer is not many. Cyclists need to make good observations and they need to ride predictably. Taking the lane is fine, but not without looking.
The driving obviously wasn't great but I see worse from my saddle most days. I'd feel lucky to get away with what he (the cyclist) did there.

[anonymous-user]

There're a lot of hazards in that video. Two cyclists ahead, one to the nearside and one to the offside, junctions on either side, parked cars either side, oncoming traffic, roadworks signs, central islands.

The driver looks to me like they've been distracted and the same time failed to adjust their speed whilst approaching the cyclist. This means they're not sufficiently prepared when the cyclist does something stupid.

Like many accidents, if only one party fks up, the accident can be avoided. If two fk up at the same time, the chances of an accident increase.