RE: Motorists To Take Blame For Cycle Crashes
Discussion
darmis said:
Vipers said:
darmis said:
Been there. Indicating left at an appropriate distance before the junction, but the cyclist still tried to overtake on my left as I made the turn. I suppose he did manage to overtake, sort of: he 'overtook' my bonnet as his bike ploughed into my car. He knew it was his fault (a distinct lack of complaint and an extremely sheepish expression), but he picked himself and the bike off the floor and wandered off with no apology. Cost me to get the car repaired... but it should've been him.
.
Did you do a mirror check before turning left then?, obviously not. If he was far enough in front of you to come in contact with your bonnet, you should have seen him. Planks I know, but we all have a responsibility on our roads, and lets face it, proportianly, is it cyclists, or motorists who cause havoc? by not abiding by the rules of the road. I speak as a cyclists and a driver with over 40 years experience on our roads..
The cyclist wasn't in front, he was following me (sorry - not clear in my original post). His bike hit the front nearside wing by the front passenger door and he 'overtook' me by rolling from there over the bonnet. You'll have to ask him why he chose to overtake on the left a car that was indicating and already turning left.
I wouldn't pass a motorist on the side they were indicating, but then I wouldn't deliberately drive into a cyclist in my car either.
Say you were on a dual carriage way and you're coming up behind a slow moving van. You stick your indicator on for a few seconds, look in your right mirror and you see a car approaching fast in the lane you want to pull into. Do you just cut him up? After all, you're indicating, and he's breaking the speed limit... OF COURSE YOU BLOODY DON'T
Foolish as it may be to pass a vehicle on the side they are indicating, it is not actually illegal. Ramming someone (you have admitted yourself that you saw) definitely is, and you are lucky you didn't get shafted by the law for it in my opinion.
Perhaps the proposal would make bad drivers like you think twice before ramming other road users?
the insurance debate seems to have a few bits of misinformation. Most horses are insured for 3rd party liability as the owner is responsible for any damage caused by the horse and you would not want to loose your home. However, cyclists, insured through 'home contents' ?? read the words. Its only insured against damage or theft. The poor 3rd party (that was me) cannot claim against your home insurance for you causing a loss to me. I could sue through the courts, expensive and cannot claim back costs only damages so unless car is written off pointless. ALL road users should have 3rd party liability. ALL road users should have a licence (training). ALL road users should have a vehicle safety test annually (MoT a horse ...... interesting, lmfao) and ALL road users should be innocent until PROVEN guilty, even pedallists.
johnnie said:
... ALL road users should have 3rd party liability. ALL road users should have a licence (training). ALL road users should have a vehicle safety test annually (MoT a horse ...... interesting, lmfao) and ALL road users should be innocent until PROVEN guilty, even pedallists.
No wonder I was bored and rich when I was a 12yr old cycling to school.I could have got me one o there them pedalling licenses and spent my paper round money on insuring myself so that I could do my paper round to spend it on insurance. Drat
darmis said:
swldxer said:
HC Rule 176
176
You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care.
When I am sat at a traffic light on my bike for 5 minutes at 6am and the lights have not changed it means that the detectors have not sensed the presence of my bike due to its lack of metal. Therefore the sensor/traffic light ensemble is faulty and I can proceed.
Thanks. I see your point but, personally, I'd not want to test that theory from either a practical or a legal standpoint. I'd say that the lights are working as designed. If the design doesn't account for your carbon bike, it doesn't mean the lights are not working.176
You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care.
When I am sat at a traffic light on my bike for 5 minutes at 6am and the lights have not changed it means that the detectors have not sensed the presence of my bike due to its lack of metal. Therefore the sensor/traffic light ensemble is faulty and I can proceed.
Edited by darmis on Thursday 1st October 21:32
Derek Smith said:
I've just phoned the press office of Cycling for England and the truth is rather different to the headline and feature article.
What CfE want to promote is 'harmony on the roads' between all users and encouragement to 'share' the space.
The liability issue is not a proposal and never has been. It came up in a conversation between Dunton and the Times journo, the latter one assumes looking for a headline rather than information. It is not official, nor unofficial, policy of CfE.
If they want to share the space then they are going to have to pay road tax. I wasnt going to suggest this boefore I heard that but if they want to share it they have to pay like everyone else. But Its pretty obvious this isnt going to be put through.What CfE want to promote is 'harmony on the roads' between all users and encouragement to 'share' the space.
The liability issue is not a proposal and never has been. It came up in a conversation between Dunton and the Times journo, the latter one assumes looking for a headline rather than information. It is not official, nor unofficial, policy of CfE.
DanBMW said:
...
If they want to share the space then they are going to have to pay road tax. I wasnt going to suggest this boefore I heard that but if they want to share it they have to pay like everyone else. But Its pretty obvious this isnt going to be put through.
What if they pay already?If they want to share the space then they are going to have to pay road tax. I wasnt going to suggest this boefore I heard that but if they want to share it they have to pay like everyone else. But Its pretty obvious this isnt going to be put through.
DanBMW said:
Derek Smith said:
I've just phoned the press office of Cycling for England and the truth is rather different to the headline and feature article.
What CfE want to promote is 'harmony on the roads' between all users and encouragement to 'share' the space.
The liability issue is not a proposal and never has been. It came up in a conversation between Dunton and the Times journo, the latter one assumes looking for a headline rather than information. It is not official, nor unofficial, policy of CfE.
If they want to share the space then they are going to have to pay road tax. I wasnt going to suggest this boefore I heard that but if they want to share it they have to pay like everyone else. But Its pretty obvious this isnt going to be put through.What CfE want to promote is 'harmony on the roads' between all users and encouragement to 'share' the space.
The liability issue is not a proposal and never has been. It came up in a conversation between Dunton and the Times journo, the latter one assumes looking for a headline rather than information. It is not official, nor unofficial, policy of CfE.
AdrenalineJunkie said:
TVRWannabee said:
Andy Meads said:
I am a petrolhead and also a keen cyclist. I think this proposal is absolutely absurd. Everyone is responsible for their own actions and omissions.
+1 
I agree entirely.
darmis said:
Mr Gear said:
Your example is a great bit of ammo to introduce the proposals. So, you looked in your mirror, you saw you were being passed by a cyclist on the left and you STILL cut him up and knocked him off? Perhaps you wouldn't have done this if you knew you'd get dragged through the coals for it.
In retrospect, I can see how you have arrived at this interpretation of my previous posts. However, please be assured that your description bears little resemblance to the event itself and I remain entirely certain I was not at fault. My mistake was to post with what I now see as a lack of clarity or with too brief a description. darmis said:
Vipers said:
Interesting situation, how long do you sit at the red light?, in the past I have driven off in my car through a red, when I got to the point where in my humble opinion, and based on over 40 years experience as a driver, I was of the opinion they were never to change, what else can you do?
I agree. I have certainly encountered faulty traffic lights, and have done as the previously-quoted Highway Code rule states. Genuine question: is a set of traffic lights faulty if they work for all vehicles except that one carbon-framed bike?
I can only guess that they are, but can see arguments for and against.
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=20...
I guess if it is not going to recognise you are there, you have to 'ignore' it, but proceed safely as per the highway code. There is no other legal way of passing it (other than I presume carrying the bike (which should be no problem if it is carbon!) on the pavement, certainly you can't wait indefinetly. It is illegal to push a bike on the pavement (ridiculous, but true) and if you push it with the wheels in the road, you'd still be pushing it through a red light. Whilst illegal, I can't see anyone being too upset by either of those options.
BUT - seems you should complain about the light to your council and they should be able to fix it, ot you could stick something steel to the bike, though bearing in mind you went to the expense of buying carbon, can see why you wouldn't want to!
The sheer ARROGANCE of cyclists never fails to amaze me 
There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
Scot 62 said:
The sheer ARROGANCE of cyclists never fails to amaze me
There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
That's a good idea! Why don't you set it up and start campaigning. You can all sit in a village hall and rock back and forth mumbling about road tax and insurance, frothing at the mouth and having recurring flashbacks about redlights. You could have a website with a forum where you can all type the same stuff and not read anyone else's posts, and you can be VERY VERY angry and campaign to ban whatever you don't understand.
zebedee said:
BUT - seems you should complain about the light to your council and they should be able to fix it, ot you could stick something steel to the bike, though bearing in mind you went to the expense of buying carbon, can see why you wouldn't want to!
I find that with some sets of lights, laying the bike flat over the detector wires is enough to trip them. My cranks are titanium so maybe that does it, or maybe the aluminium rims.Scot 62 said:
The sheer ARROGANCE of cyclists never fails to amaze me
There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
You have loads such as SafeSpeed and the Assoc. of British Drivers, as well as sane ones such as RAC and AA.There are plenty of cycle tracks in this area, but they are seldome used !. I drive along the A78 coastal road between Seamill / Ardrossan every day, the 8 foot pavement doubles as a cycle track, but there is always at least one clown who decides to ride on the dangerous busy trunk road.
Another place you can spot them is cycling on the hard shoulder of dual carriageways - often against the traffic. This is a criminal offence, but I have yet to see any of them being stopped by the police.
In this country cyclists clearly are above the law !.
They contribute nothing towards the roads, neither do they need insurance but are constantly demanding.
It's about time that Motorists set up a pressure group.
I occasionally almost run ino the back of cyclists that don't bother to check before hopping off the pavement onto the road... and this whilst i'm on bike myself.
I think they learn their lesson when I shout at them to open their f
king eyes.
Motorists will probably get the blame for burglary and rape one day. Anything to get cars off the road.
I think they learn their lesson when I shout at them to open their f
king eyes.Motorists will probably get the blame for burglary and rape one day. Anything to get cars off the road.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff