Oh No Not Another Cyclist Rant
Discussion
Here we go. Bit of a long one I'm afraid.
I commute across South London every day to work. In that, I come across my fair share of idiocy, lunacy, people on phones while driving, aggression, tail-gating, people not looking what they're doing, speeding, dangerous overtaking, claptrap vehicles, insane minicabs et cetera et cetera yada yada ad infinitum.
One learns fairly quickly to have patience, to be tolerant, and to have nineteen pairs of eyes constantly looking around you.
South London also has its fair share of cyclists, who also come in all stripes.
I drive with great awareness for both motorcyclists and cyclists. If things go wrong - regardless of who is at fault - it is the one on two wheels who will have the broken bones or broken neck, not me in my safe metal shell. I give plenty of room, never overtake unless I have plenty of time and space to do so, and generally allow them as much expediency as is reasonable.
People may disagree with me on the following general point; I am also a believer that traffic systems are designed for cars, naturally so, and are in certain places and situations inherently dangerous for cyclists. The two frequently do not mix well together, as we well know from threads here on PH, and, as above, it is the cyclist who will always come off worst. Thus, I do not bemoan cyclists going through red lights when safe to do so, or ignoring other rules which may endanger them. Anything to keep out of harms way, so long as they accept that in doing so any risk is entirely theirs.
And that last point brings me to this morning.
Part of my commute takes me up the huge hill that is Crystal Palace. I turn right out of a normal give way junction onto a hillclimb toward the Palace at the top. It's a busy junction in the mornings. The majority of the traffic coming down the hill turns left into the road I am pulling out of. It is normal for there to be three or four cars slowing, indicators on to turn left, allowing you to pull out of the junction to turn right up the hill.
And so it was this morning, I'm looking up the hill for traffic coming down, there are three or four cars indicating left into the road at which I am waiting. I can see their indicators, there is no traffic from the left, so I pull out turning right up the hill.
Next thing I know there's a cyclist who came from nowhere, that I entirely did not see, hairing down the hill at speed overtaking the three or four cars who were indicating to turn into the road I was pulling out of. As he was overtaking, he was largely hidden from my view by those cars. I'm guessing he must have seen me however, and anticipated that I'd not see him, or anticipated that I'd ignore him, as he managed to slow and just go around the back of my car as I pulled away. He mouthed a load of abuse at me as he did so, but my window was up so didn't hear a word of it. Had he hit me at the speed he was going, even after slowing as he had, he would have ended up a fairly messy pulp of mashed up human on the tarmac.
By the normal rules of the road, taking the primary position, the cyclist should be in traffic, waiting behind the slowing cars turning left into the road in which I was waiting. I would be fine to pull out as I did, the road being clear.
If it was a car that had pulled off that overtake, I would be right to be furious, and had he collided, he'd be entirely at fault.
And that's why I stress the point above, that I am all for a cyclist ignoring the normal rules of the road, so long as they accept that risk. What I do not expect, and why this idiot annoyed me this morning, is for them to get annoyed at other road users when their rule-breaking catches them out. Like I say, the risk is theirs, and I'm happy for them to take and accept that risk, but don't f
king well abuse me when I'm obeying the rules of the road and that risk does not pay off.
I commute across South London every day to work. In that, I come across my fair share of idiocy, lunacy, people on phones while driving, aggression, tail-gating, people not looking what they're doing, speeding, dangerous overtaking, claptrap vehicles, insane minicabs et cetera et cetera yada yada ad infinitum.
One learns fairly quickly to have patience, to be tolerant, and to have nineteen pairs of eyes constantly looking around you.
South London also has its fair share of cyclists, who also come in all stripes.
I drive with great awareness for both motorcyclists and cyclists. If things go wrong - regardless of who is at fault - it is the one on two wheels who will have the broken bones or broken neck, not me in my safe metal shell. I give plenty of room, never overtake unless I have plenty of time and space to do so, and generally allow them as much expediency as is reasonable.
People may disagree with me on the following general point; I am also a believer that traffic systems are designed for cars, naturally so, and are in certain places and situations inherently dangerous for cyclists. The two frequently do not mix well together, as we well know from threads here on PH, and, as above, it is the cyclist who will always come off worst. Thus, I do not bemoan cyclists going through red lights when safe to do so, or ignoring other rules which may endanger them. Anything to keep out of harms way, so long as they accept that in doing so any risk is entirely theirs.
And that last point brings me to this morning.
Part of my commute takes me up the huge hill that is Crystal Palace. I turn right out of a normal give way junction onto a hillclimb toward the Palace at the top. It's a busy junction in the mornings. The majority of the traffic coming down the hill turns left into the road I am pulling out of. It is normal for there to be three or four cars slowing, indicators on to turn left, allowing you to pull out of the junction to turn right up the hill.
And so it was this morning, I'm looking up the hill for traffic coming down, there are three or four cars indicating left into the road at which I am waiting. I can see their indicators, there is no traffic from the left, so I pull out turning right up the hill.
Next thing I know there's a cyclist who came from nowhere, that I entirely did not see, hairing down the hill at speed overtaking the three or four cars who were indicating to turn into the road I was pulling out of. As he was overtaking, he was largely hidden from my view by those cars. I'm guessing he must have seen me however, and anticipated that I'd not see him, or anticipated that I'd ignore him, as he managed to slow and just go around the back of my car as I pulled away. He mouthed a load of abuse at me as he did so, but my window was up so didn't hear a word of it. Had he hit me at the speed he was going, even after slowing as he had, he would have ended up a fairly messy pulp of mashed up human on the tarmac.
By the normal rules of the road, taking the primary position, the cyclist should be in traffic, waiting behind the slowing cars turning left into the road in which I was waiting. I would be fine to pull out as I did, the road being clear.
If it was a car that had pulled off that overtake, I would be right to be furious, and had he collided, he'd be entirely at fault.
And that's why I stress the point above, that I am all for a cyclist ignoring the normal rules of the road, so long as they accept that risk. What I do not expect, and why this idiot annoyed me this morning, is for them to get annoyed at other road users when their rule-breaking catches them out. Like I say, the risk is theirs, and I'm happy for them to take and accept that risk, but don't f
king well abuse me when I'm obeying the rules of the road and that risk does not pay off.Edited by Timbola on Thursday 16th May 09:33
You say at speed but how fast...30...40...50? If he/she was overtaking cars downhill that's a risky thing to do but overtaking cars that are turning left not so sure. It could have been a motorcycle doing the same thing yet you are quick to point out the risk to the cyclist.
I would say 50/50.
edit. and as for 'rules of the road'...a cyclist ordinarily wouldn't be sitting in traffic.
I would say 50/50.
edit. and as for 'rules of the road'...a cyclist ordinarily wouldn't be sitting in traffic.
Timbola said:
If it was a car that had pulled off that overtake, I would be right to be furious, and had he collided, he'd be entirely at fault.
Wrong.He was daft to overtake at speed near a junction.
However you failed to give way.
Would it be helpful if I add an anecdote about some terribly dangerous driving I saw this morning?
Ok. Thanks for these responses.
It's gotten me thinking.
I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible?
Had he hit me, and sued me for ending up in a wheelchair, and this went to court, would I be in the wrong?
Is it considered acceptable to overtake at a junction, as I described?
Genuinely not so sure about my position now.
It's gotten me thinking.
I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible?
Had he hit me, and sued me for ending up in a wheelchair, and this went to court, would I be in the wrong?
Is it considered acceptable to overtake at a junction, as I described?
Genuinely not so sure about my position now.
I drive into London a lot, and without fail once a week someone on two wheels tries to commit suicide under my car and only my forward planning and good reactions saves them. I find it inexplicable that a cyclist would willingly put their life in someone else's hands. It's also one of the primary reasons I chose an automatic for the job, as you can "hover" your left foot over the brake pedal which cuts down reaction times a lot. Whenever I see a cyclist cause an accident they always aggressively blame the driver. It's so bad recently that I have installed TWO sets of in car dash cams, to cover front and rear and left and right. I would also like to add I have not hit anyone in 10 years, my only accidents have been people driving into the back on me whilst I have been stationary.
If you're turning right across the road, then you're the one with the give way line to say you can't pull out.
Even if the cyclist had been a car which had fully pulled over to the other side of the road to overtake the cars waiting to turn left, he would still have had priority over you, as you're the one with the give way line. Given that on many roads a cyclist can pass a car waiting to turn left without even having to cross over the the centre line at all, he's absolutely within his rights to do so, and had he hit you, you would've been 100% at fault from the way you've described it.
That's not to say the cyclist wasn't behaving stupidly though. Rule number 1 of cycle commuting through London (or anywhere really) is don't get yourself to the left of a large vehicle turning left, but "don't ride significantly faster than the traffic around you" is certainly up there as well.
Had I been the cyclist (and I often am, as I ride to Waterloo and back 2-3 days per week) I would've also overtaken the cars waiting to turn left. I wouldn't have been riding "at considerable speed", on the grounds that the traffic around me wasn't, so there wouldn't have been any chance of an accident, but I would certainly not have reacted positively to anyone suggesting I was in any way wrong to be riding where I was.
Even if the cyclist had been a car which had fully pulled over to the other side of the road to overtake the cars waiting to turn left, he would still have had priority over you, as you're the one with the give way line. Given that on many roads a cyclist can pass a car waiting to turn left without even having to cross over the the centre line at all, he's absolutely within his rights to do so, and had he hit you, you would've been 100% at fault from the way you've described it.
That's not to say the cyclist wasn't behaving stupidly though. Rule number 1 of cycle commuting through London (or anywhere really) is don't get yourself to the left of a large vehicle turning left, but "don't ride significantly faster than the traffic around you" is certainly up there as well.
Had I been the cyclist (and I often am, as I ride to Waterloo and back 2-3 days per week) I would've also overtaken the cars waiting to turn left. I wouldn't have been riding "at considerable speed", on the grounds that the traffic around me wasn't, so there wouldn't have been any chance of an accident, but I would certainly not have reacted positively to anyone suggesting I was in any way wrong to be riding where I was.
Edited by Kermit power on Thursday 16th May 09:51
"I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible? "
That is just sorry I didn't see you !.
Go to Bikers Banter and look at filtering, that is effectively what the cyclist was doing. I doubt he was going in excess of the speed limit of sill speed just appeared out of nowhere.
That is just sorry I didn't see you !.
Go to Bikers Banter and look at filtering, that is effectively what the cyclist was doing. I doubt he was going in excess of the speed limit of sill speed just appeared out of nowhere.
Timbola said:
Ok. Thanks for these responses.
It's gotten me thinking.
I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible?
Had he hit me, and sued me for ending up in a wheelchair, and this went to court, would I be in the wrong?
Is it considered acceptable to overtake at a junction, as I described?
Genuinely not so sure about my position now.
The road wasn't clear, as there were cars on it (albeit indicating left). You can never guarantee that they will turn left, so it's prudent not to assume that they will.It's gotten me thinking.
I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible?
Had he hit me, and sued me for ending up in a wheelchair, and this went to court, would I be in the wrong?
Is it considered acceptable to overtake at a junction, as I described?
Genuinely not so sure about my position now.
Fundamentally he had priority as you were seeking to turn onto a major road. Regardless of his overtaking (which is not sensible), he had right of way.
Had there been a collision I think you would struggle to argue that you hadn't been careless in failing to give way. I don't know what the law/insurance position would be.
As others have said - the premise of your story is simply "I pulled out believing it to be clear but it wasn't". However, even though the rules say as such, the cyclist did himself no favours at all. What he was, incredibly stupidly, doing was going much faster than the traffic around him.
OP I'm going to guess that you were pulling out of Kingswood Drive onto College Road? I used to live near there and commuted by cycle down that hill every single day for 5 years.
If we are talking about the same road then:
1. 90%+ of the cars turn left into the road your were turning right from as straight ahead only goes to the Dulwich College tollgate.
2. The cars turning left have to do so into quite a tight turning and hence often swing out to the right in order to smooth out the turn.
3. There are speed bumps in the road that the cyclist would have to avoid - they could pass to the left of them but that would be suicidal as it would put them into the side of the cars turning left.
4. It's a steep hill, on a hybrid bike I would easily hit 30mph passing the junction you were pulling out of.
5. As a result of the reduced visibility I would anticipate if cars were going to pull out and act accordingly. I also often stood up on the bike to make my helmet light visible above cars.
6. I used to have a near collision at that junction perhaps every 2 weeks - every single time, both myself and car driver had taken avoiding action and each and every single time the driver had apologised for pulling out on me.
7. A cyclist or motorcyclist comes down that hill probably every 20 seconds or so in rush hour. If you've used that road before then you should have anticipated that cyclists and motorcyclists may be passing and again drive accordingly.
To summarise, you need to be more aware of your surroundings. Cyclists are in some danger at that junction, but only because drivers (like you) ignored their right of way.
If we are talking about the same road then:
1. 90%+ of the cars turn left into the road your were turning right from as straight ahead only goes to the Dulwich College tollgate.
2. The cars turning left have to do so into quite a tight turning and hence often swing out to the right in order to smooth out the turn.
3. There are speed bumps in the road that the cyclist would have to avoid - they could pass to the left of them but that would be suicidal as it would put them into the side of the cars turning left.
4. It's a steep hill, on a hybrid bike I would easily hit 30mph passing the junction you were pulling out of.
5. As a result of the reduced visibility I would anticipate if cars were going to pull out and act accordingly. I also often stood up on the bike to make my helmet light visible above cars.
6. I used to have a near collision at that junction perhaps every 2 weeks - every single time, both myself and car driver had taken avoiding action and each and every single time the driver had apologised for pulling out on me.
7. A cyclist or motorcyclist comes down that hill probably every 20 seconds or so in rush hour. If you've used that road before then you should have anticipated that cyclists and motorcyclists may be passing and again drive accordingly.
To summarise, you need to be more aware of your surroundings. Cyclists are in some danger at that junction, but only because drivers (like you) ignored their right of way.
This is one of those situations where some cyclists and motorcyclists seem to be happy to put themselves at risk, as long as they have the law on their side.
In my opinion, technically you were in the wrong for pulling from a side road into a main road. The cyclist had right of way, and as another poster commented, assuming from an indicator that someone is going to make a turn can be dangerous.
However, despite being technically right, the cyclist is not helping him/herself. I commute via motorcycle and am fully aware that if there is a queue of cars turning off the main road I am on, into a side road, and I overtake on their right side, there is a good chance that anyone pulling out of the side road may not see me, so I overtake slowly, and with caution.
So I say 50/50, you should always be prepared for cyclists/motorcyclists overtaking cars that are turning off a main road and be prepared for them, similarly they should be prepared for you.
In my opinion, technically you were in the wrong for pulling from a side road into a main road. The cyclist had right of way, and as another poster commented, assuming from an indicator that someone is going to make a turn can be dangerous.
However, despite being technically right, the cyclist is not helping him/herself. I commute via motorcycle and am fully aware that if there is a queue of cars turning off the main road I am on, into a side road, and I overtake on their right side, there is a good chance that anyone pulling out of the side road may not see me, so I overtake slowly, and with caution.
So I say 50/50, you should always be prepared for cyclists/motorcyclists overtaking cars that are turning off a main road and be prepared for them, similarly they should be prepared for you.
Timbola said:
So indeed, not defensible.
The consensus is that I was in the wrong here.
The consensus is that I was in the wrong here.
Chances are he was hidden behind your A pillar. He obviously also has a degree of culpability for overtaking near a junction too, which is probably why he slowed 
The reason you got a mouthful is it's bloody scary when something pulls out, your heart is usually pumping hard on a bike so you're fuelled up with adrenaline. Don't take it personally, just move on
standardman said:
"I pulled out onto, what was to my eye, an entirely clear road. Is that defensible? "
That is just sorry I didn't see you !.
Go to Bikers Banter and look at filtering, that is effectively what the cyclist was doing. I doubt he was going in excess of the speed limit of sill speed just appeared out of nowhere.
Exactly my point earlier. That is just sorry I didn't see you !.
Go to Bikers Banter and look at filtering, that is effectively what the cyclist was doing. I doubt he was going in excess of the speed limit of sill speed just appeared out of nowhere.
Its not smart to assume that two or three cars are turning, I will always wait until I can see the last car turning and a gap. Having ridden both motorcycles and bikes its one of the most scary things that will happen to you.
BUT
I wouldn't attack a car at a junction and always look at the driver to make sure he/she is looking at ME not the road or anything else.
Until we know the speeds involved I'll still say 50/50. If the cyclist turns out to have been filtering at a sane speed then you're going to have to put it down to not paying enough attention OP.
Timbola said:
So indeed, not defensible.
The consensus is that I was in the wrong here.
Blimey! Someone on PH actually prepared to listen to and consider other people's statements rather than sticking to their starting position come what may????? It'll never catch on!!! The consensus is that I was in the wrong here.
From the way you've described it, I'd say yes, technically you were in the wrong, but the cyclist was also foolish for failing to allow for the fact that you might drive as you did.
It's easy to get on a moral high horse and say people should never, ever turn right across a road until it's completely clear in both directions, but then those of us who live in built up areas know that people would die of starvation waiting to turn out of side roads if they did this.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff