"We are the Highway Code“

"We are the Highway Code“

Author
Discussion

Master Bean

3,517 posts

119 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
So basically you pulled out in front of someone then got shouted at for being a knober.

Pica-Pica

13,623 posts

83 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
Only two words to say:
Jeremy Vine

Mr Moley

527 posts

189 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
The Regents Park Peleto...ssers are a different breed I'm afraid. Just avoid them at all costs as you will always be wrong. They treat the outer circle as if it's their own personal velodrome and you are just another infidel.

whimsical ninja

132 posts

26 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
Outer Circle has got to be one of the safest roads to cycle, all things considered, speeders aside. There are plenty of times when cyclists are perfectly justified in making a fuss/stirring up a bit of conflict. Unless you were being an absolute throbber, which it doesn't sound like you were, then this isn't one of them.

Foss62

993 posts

64 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
Master Bean said:
So basically you pulled out in front of someone then got shouted at for being a knober.
smile That’s exactly as I read it.

Tribal Chestnut

2,997 posts

181 months

Friday 24th March 2023
quotequote all
Just ignore the comment - it’s up to the faster vehicle to pass when it’s safe. Keep an eye on your mirrors, indicate when needed and don’t do anything sudden - so no need to behave any differently to how you would at any other time.

gazza285

9,780 posts

207 months

Saturday 25th March 2023
quotequote all

MustangGT

11,555 posts

279 months

Saturday 25th March 2023
quotequote all
LordBretSinclair said:
MustangGT said:
IIRC the HC requires you overtake to the offside, so no, because he should not be passing on the left.

S163, which is for all road users says::

? only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
What about the rest of that rule for cyclists????
"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left .........."
Good point. However, that does contradict other rules, about distancing etc. A cyclist should be at least 50cm out from the kerb, and the vehicle driver should leave at least 1.5m. This would require the driver to have both noticed the cyclist and be able to leave 2m from the kerb. It does also state the cyclist should be careful doing it.

Once again, legislation passed without considering other aspects of it.

Mave

8,208 posts

214 months

Saturday 25th March 2023
quotequote all
MustangGT said:
LordBretSinclair said:
MustangGT said:
IIRC the HC requires you overtake to the offside, so no, because he should not be passing on the left.

S163, which is for all road users says::

? only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
What about the rest of that rule for cyclists????
"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left .........."
Good point. However, that does contradict other rules, about distancing etc. A cyclist should be at least 50cm out from the kerb, and the vehicle driver should leave at least 1.5m. This would require the driver to have both noticed the cyclist and be able to leave 2m from the kerb. It does also state the cyclist should be careful doing it.

Once again, legislation passed without considering other aspects of it.
That rule is for "riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you"... Ie not applicable to a cyclist passing slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left

MustangGT

11,555 posts

279 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Mave said:
MustangGT said:
LordBretSinclair said:
MustangGT said:
IIRC the HC requires you overtake to the offside, so no, because he should not be passing on the left.

S163, which is for all road users says::

? only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
What about the rest of that rule for cyclists????
"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left .........."
Good point. However, that does contradict other rules, about distancing etc. A cyclist should be at least 50cm out from the kerb, and the vehicle driver should leave at least 1.5m. This would require the driver to have both noticed the cyclist and be able to leave 2m from the kerb. It does also state the cyclist should be careful doing it.

Once again, legislation passed without considering other aspects of it.
That rule is for "riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you"... Ie not applicable to a cyclist passing slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left
Correct, however, the OP stated he was travelling at around 20mph, the signed speed limit, so it cannot apply.

What The Deuces

2,780 posts

23 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
MustangGT said:
Mave said:
MustangGT said:
LordBretSinclair said:
MustangGT said:
IIRC the HC requires you overtake to the offside, so no, because he should not be passing on the left.

S163, which is for all road users says::

? only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
What about the rest of that rule for cyclists????
"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left .........."
Good point. However, that does contradict other rules, about distancing etc. A cyclist should be at least 50cm out from the kerb, and the vehicle driver should leave at least 1.5m. This would require the driver to have both noticed the cyclist and be able to leave 2m from the kerb. It does also state the cyclist should be careful doing it.

Once again, legislation passed without considering other aspects of it.
That rule is for "riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you"... Ie not applicable to a cyclist passing slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left
Correct, however, the OP stated he was travelling at around 20mph, the signed speed limit, so it cannot apply.
Playing devils advocate of the car pulled in front of the cyclists doing 30mph and the car was doing 20, (speed limit not applicable to bikes) then the car was travelling slowly.

And probably should have just waited

Griffith4ever

4,143 posts

34 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
.... so you are accepting it's fine for bikes to ride faster than 20mph limits (which one assumes are put in place due to being very densely populated areas/lots of pedestrians)? Simply because the law says so? Ignoring competely the reason the 20 was put in place?

It's no wonder there is so much hate for cycling groups on the road. And the cheeky buggers overtake him on BOTH sides, and then complain he's not left enough room, that THEY took up, and blocked both sides so he had nowhere to go...

Devil's advocate my butt.


vaud

50,291 posts

154 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Solocle said:
Speed limits only apply to motor vehicles.
I got stopped by the police for doing 48 in a 30 down a very steep hill locally when I was 16.

More a telling off than anything else as they pointed out how long it took to stop and how no one would expect me to be going quite that fast...

What The Deuces

2,780 posts

23 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Griffith4ever said:
.... so you are accepting it's fine for bikes to ride faster than 20mph limits (which one assumes are put in place due to being very densely populated areas/lots of pedestrians)? Simply because the law says so? Ignoring competely the reason the 20 was put in place?

It's no wonder there is so much hate for cycling groups on the road. And the cheeky buggers overtake him on BOTH sides, and then complain he's not left enough room, that THEY took up, and blocked both sides so he had nowhere to go...

Devil's advocate my butt.
I’m just discussing the legality not the morality


If the speed limit was soooo important then my view is it would apply to all road users? Maybe cars are more dangerous to other road users than bicycles?

I also suspect they complained because he pulled in front of them and went slower than they were but we won’t know.

Still the whole situation won’t help either side get along with the other.

Had I been in the car I’d have waited for them to pass, had I been on the bike I wouldn’t have undertaken.




Edited by What The Deuces on Sunday 26th March 13:15


Edited by What The Deuces on Sunday 26th March 13:22

Milkyway

9,291 posts

52 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
When walking, pedestrians should walk facing the oncoming traffic... for their safety.

It seems that cyclists have adopted this rule too now. confused

4rephill

5,040 posts

177 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Yex GTR said:
Might explain why so my cyclists get killed by vehicles turning left.

Darwinism at it's very best.
My understanding of the new ( ridiculous ) Laws is:

If you intend to turn left, you should check for cyclists who are behind you, cycling on your nearside, and rather than the cyclist having to slow for the vehicle ahead, to allow it to turn left, the vehicle ahead has to slow down and stop if need be, to allow the cyclist to undertake them, before turning left.

I seem to recall that this also applies if the cyclist is also turning left - So you have to let the cyclist get ahead of you, and then be held up by them, rather than you simply driving off on your way ahead of them, without being delayed by the cyclist.


It's all basically a plan to make driving as miserable as possible, and cause big delays, as vehicles are forced to travel at bicycle speeds, instead of motor vehicle speeds, in the hope that people will ditch their vehicles wink

Griffith4ever

4,143 posts

34 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
What The Deuces said:
Maybe cars are more dangerous to other road users than bicycles?

I also suspect they complained because he pulled in front of them and went slower than they were but we won’t know.

Still the whole situation won’t help either side get along with the other.

Had I been in the car I’d have waited for them to pass, had I been on the bike I wouldn’t have undertaken.

[footnote]Edited by What The Deuces on Sunday 26th March 13:15[/footnot
I'm not sure how much less dangerous a wall of bicycles is at 30mph, than a car at 20mph, to a pedestrian. Pretty similar I'd guess. The ground that your head hits is the same ground either way.

You are assuming the OP pulled "out in front" of the bikes in a dangerous manner. He stated he simply pulled out. I very much doubt he did that wrecklessly and then post don here. When does "pulling out in front of" become simply "pulling out" ? 50m? 100m? totally out of sight?

Just seems like an attempt at victim blaming to me.

Zumbruk

7,848 posts

259 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Jamescrs said:
I do find though on the odd occasions I drve in London it seems to be a completely different set of rules to the rest of the country, or people treat it as if it is
I can only hope so, since my experience from a decade walking from Moorgate Station to Monument and back each working day taught me that all (or close enough to all as to make no difference) cyclists are hypocritical scoff-law egotistical aholes who don't give a single solitary flying fk for anyone else on the roads, or for the rules, signage, markings or traffic lights, and especially not for pedestrians, whom they treat in exactly the same way they spend endless hours whining about being treated by motorists.

What The Deuces

2,780 posts

23 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
Griffith4ever said:
What The Deuces said:
Maybe cars are more dangerous to other road users than bicycles?

I also suspect they complained because he pulled in front of them and went slower than they were but we won’t know.

Still the whole situation won’t help either side get along with the other.

Had I been in the car I’d have waited for them to pass, had I been on the bike I wouldn’t have undertaken.

[footnote]Edited by What The Deuces on Sunday 26th March 13:15[/footnot
I'm not sure how much less dangerous a wall of bicycles is at 30mph, than a car at 20mph, to a pedestrian. Pretty similar I'd guess. The ground that your head hits is the same ground either way.

You are assuming the OP pulled "out in front" of the bikes in a dangerous manner. He stated he simply pulled out. I very much doubt he did that wrecklessly and then post don here. When does "pulling out in front of" become simply "pulling out" ? 50m? 100m? totally out of sight?

Just seems like an attempt at victim blaming to me.
My post was nothing of the sort. Very balanced.

I’d suggest the OP was careful to say pulled out safely as they were in sight, clearly they weren’t a huge distance away as they passed him!

As I said I’ll repeat, if I was on the bikes I wouldn’t have passed, if I was in the car I probably wouldn’t have pulled out.

I think there’s an element of sthousery all round probably

Randy Winkman

16,021 posts

188 months

Sunday 26th March 2023
quotequote all
I don't drive at 70mph in the outside lane of a motorway because that's the speed limit.