Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Close Encounter

Options
  • 27-03-2010 2:40pm
    #1
    alanucc
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭


    Hi all,

    I could have posted this in the motoring section, but im interested in hearing the cyclist opinions!

    Was just out driving there and I pull up to a T junction and I stop for about 20-30 seconds to let the road clear. So it comes time to pull out and I see that my left is clear, but a pedestrian has walked up to the kerb on the right and is partially obscuring my view. However, I'm sure that there's no car approaching.

    I pull out, and a cyclist comes out of the blind spot (fast) and is forced to make an emergency stop, falling off the bike in the process. Thankfully I don't think he was hurt and he didnt hit me. Shouldnt the cyclist have exercised more caution here? Or is it me that should have done better?


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    projectmayhem
    Registered Users Posts: 9,481 ✭✭✭projectmayhem


    Firstly, whenever coming out of a t-junction, one (regardless of the type of transport, car, bike or walking) should never make an assumption that it's ok to proceed if they're not absolutely sure. This is what causes accidents.

    It depends on the type of road but if the cyclist was going in a straight line at speed (I would presume he's not a superhero and was doing speed limits, and not going faster then cars) he was well in the right on this situation.


  • Options
    #3
    Nietzschean
    Registered Users Posts: 7,314 ✭✭✭Nietzschean


    In general one is supposed to be able to account for unforceen obstacles on the road, which would just lead it to be accident and no one really at fault. Though i would ask how you pulled out onto the road, slowly or way clear best to get it done before a car comes? it sounds from your description you did the latter whereas you should have done the former with a partially obstructed view? giving the cyclist space to go around you on the road if he was close enough to require emergency breaking.

    That said , wasn't there, you might have pulled out slowly....


  • Options
    #4
    redmaxi
    Registered Users Posts: 297 ✭✭redmaxi


    Oh yeah all the cyclist fault of course, imagine going fast and what was he doing in your blind spot for heavens sake. The cheek of him. It's a disgrace !
    At least you asked him if he was alright, oh wait......


  • Options
    #5
    Nietzschean
    Registered Users Posts: 7,314 ✭✭✭Nietzschean


    projectmayhem wrote: »
    Firstly, whenever coming out of a t-junction, one (regardless of the type of transport, car, bike or walking) should never make an assumption that it's ok to proceed if they're not absolutely sure. This is what causes accidents.
    There are junctions where being sure its entirely clear is impossible just have to go onto the road slowly...
    It depends on the type of road but if the cyclist was going in a straight line at speed (I would presume he's not a superhero and was doing speed limits, and not going faster then cars) he was well in the right on this situation.

    If the road was on an incline and anyway bendy the cyclist could be going faster than cars down it, and at speeds which would be unsafe for the roads and would make the cyclist easily in the wrong.

    We don't know enough here to really say who was right/wrong really...


  • Options
    #6
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    I'm afraid it was your fault. It's your duty to make sure the way is clear. You said yourself you were satisfied that there was no car coming, but you failed to spot other traffic, i.e. the bike.

    Put the boot on the other foot for a second. If you'd been driving down that road and a car pulled out in front of you causing a collision or near miss and the driver said that their view had been obscured, would you feel that you were at fault?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,559 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    I had a situation (several decades ago!) when I was driving, turning on to a major road at a T-junction. My view was partly obscured by a bus picking up passengers. I completely missed a van coming past the bus. We collided. He was probably breaking the speed limit, but so far as I was concerned it was entirely my fault. I should have made sure the road was clear, and it was not. The fact he was travelling at speed possibly contributed to the amount of damage, and I suspect the insurance company could have sought an adjustment in respect of this.

    In the case of the cyclist in this case, they cannot be expecting someone to pull out in front of them from a side road. Their speed is, in my view, irrelevant (unless they were cycling dangerously or recklessly) (there is no speed limit for cyclists)

    Based on what you are saying, it would appear to me that you are entirely at fault here


  • Options
    #8
    happy_73
    Registered Users Posts: 211 ✭✭happy_73


    As far as I'm aware (and it's totally irrelevant if you are in a car/var/truck or on a bike), if you are the one negotiating the movement going through the junction (i.e. not the one with right of way/going straight ahead) you are at fault.

    Learnt the hard way when crossing a junction (in a car) and a motor bike going straight ahead hit me (no one hurt thankfully, young and foolish me behind the wheel).

    S


  • Options
    #9
    alanucc
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭alanucc


    Clarifying a few things:

    Yes I did stop and ask if he was ok - to be greeted by abuse

    As to how I pulled out - I pulled out at a reasonable pace, wouldnt say I crawled out or darted out.

    The cyclist was going pretty quickly, the junction is at the bottom of a long slope.

    I uploaded an aerial photo of the junction. Notice that there's a house on the corner as well which restricts view, and the road loops slightly heading south.

    http://i43.tinypic.com/10curdf.png

    Legal fault aside, if I was in his shoes, I wouldnt assume anything approaching a junction like that.


  • Options
    #10
    kenmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,276 ✭✭✭kenmc


    alanucc wrote: »
    Yes I did stop and ask if he was ok - to be greeted by abuse
    Well what did you expect - you could have killed him! Did you want a box of chocolates for asking him if he was OK?
    The way you describe it, you're totally at fault, and you're lucky he's "Ok".


  • Options
    #11
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    You were completely in the wrong here, you pulled out into the path of another vehicle having right of way without checking that the road was clear.

    To be honest I'm astounded you are even asking who was at fault here. Although there was no contact, you were still the proximate cause of the cyclist crashing, I'm not surprised he let out a torrent of abuse.

    Post the same details over in motors, they will tell you exactly the same thing.

    If it was a car you pulled out in front of would you think it would make any difference? That it was a cyclist you pulled out in front of is irrelevant frankly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Diarmuid
    Registered Users Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭Diarmuid


    alanucc wrote: »
    Yes I did stop and ask if he was ok - to be greeted by abuse
    You almost put a guy in hospital , you can hardly be surprised you got some abuse
    alanucc wrote: »
    Legal fault aside, if I was in his shoes, I wouldnt assume anything approaching a junction like that.
    Welcome to the world of cycling , where every junction, parked car and overtaking car is a potential source of injury. Maybe you'll be more careful the next time.


  • Options
    #13
    me_right_one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭me_right_one


    It was your fault. Stop whinging.


  • Options
    #14
    lyders
    Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭lyders


    alanucc wrote: »
    Yes I did stop and ask if he was ok - to be greeted by abuse

    I think there are different levels of abuse. While the cyclist, who was in the right may well have a right to be angry/shocked, they do not have the right to scream abuse at the person at fault.

    I witnessed this this morning while cycling to Richmond Park. A cyclist was passing cars stopped at a red light, on the inside. I was about 100m away on the other side of the road, so didn't see the incident. I just heard the sound of car hitting bike, shortly followed by the cyclist absolutely roaring abuse at the driver whom probably made a genuine mistake. I was a distance away and I was scared, I couldn't imagine being a few feet away from him. I doubt many drivers go out of their way to injure cyclists and this reaction, in my opinion, is definitely not called for and is what gives cyclist a bad name.

    On the other hand, I did get abuse from a driver while stopped on the side of the road in Richmond Park helping a cyclist who had a mechanical.


  • Options
    #15
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    It would be nice if cyclists didn't roar abuse but frankly if you have just been knocked off your bike by a driver doing something stupid and dangerous I can completely understand it, it is a gut reaction.


  • Options
    #16
    lyders
    Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭lyders


    blorg wrote: »
    It would be nice if cyclists didn't roar abuse but frankly if you have just been knocked off your bike by a driver doing something stupid and dangerous I can completely understand it, it is a gut reaction.

    I don't think it would be my gut reaction, and it hasn't been in the past, but maybe that is just me.


  • Options
    #17
    Diarmuid
    Registered Users Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭Diarmuid


    lyders wrote: »
    I don't think it would be my gut reaction, and it hasn't been in the past, but maybe that is just me.

    Well that might be fine for you, Mother Theresa, but most people will take such a shot of adrenaline after a near - death experience ,that tipping their hat is not the first thing on their mind.


  • Options
    #18
    irishmotorist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,268 ✭✭✭irishmotorist


    OP, it sounds like it was your fault. You were the vehicle moving from a secondary road to a primary road, so it was your responsiblilty to do so when safe. It seems that you didn't spot the cyclist and this is something that happens regularly.

    Personally, when I'm on the bike and I see a car pulling out of a side road, I know to slow down because of exactly this. I wait till I get eye contact with the driver before assuming it's OK to cycle in front of him. Yes, I've got right of way etc. etc., but that won't keep me on the bike or be much consolation when somebody makes a mistake. I'd have a near miss of this type at least once a week. I reckon I'm often obscured by lamp posts etc. for the drivers first glance and by the time I get to the car, they think that their initial look that showed nothing is still valid.

    I don't think OP deserves some of the comments that he's been getting here. He came on to ask an honest question and has, no doubt, learned a lesson from the experience. I hope the cyclist has too. That's what I find road safety is all about - constantly learning from situations and making sure they don't happen again.


  • Options
    #19
    lyders
    Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭lyders


    Diarmuid wrote: »
    Well that might be fine for you, Mother Theresa, but most people will take such a shot of adrenaline after a near - death experience ,that tipping their hat is not the first thing on their mind.

    That kind of sarcasm is not necessary.

    This forum is for giving personal opinions and not for bashing other peoples'.

    My gut reaction is to make sure I am ok and that my bike is still in one piece before I go giving abuse to a driver. I'm sorry if this offends you somehow.


  • Options
    #20
    Raam
    Registered Users Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    I would be interested to know how close to the kerb the cyclist was cycling. I know when I am on an empty road I will ride in the middle of the lane in order to help make sure I am as visible as possible to traffic from side roads. It is too easy to blend into the background when cycling at the edge of the road.


  • Options
    #21
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    If it were a car in your position, and you were the other cyclist what would you be reporting now? You say you were sure no "Car" was coming. Motorists are often accused of checking only for cars and criticised for not expecting bikes.

    It gives some perspective........


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    short circuit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 730 ✭✭✭short circuit


    Diarmuid wrote: »
    Well that might be fine for you, Mother Theresa, but most people will take such a shot of adrenaline after a near - death experience ,that tipping their hat is not the first thing on their mind.

    I agree with the shot of adrenaline, but that does not mean the right to curse and having been at the receiving end of 2 incidents where cars actually crashed into me, I can assure you that whether or not my adrenaline turns into cursing has depended on the reaction of the driver.

    If their 1st reaction was to ensure I was OK, I've been pretty calm as well. But if their 1st reaction is to start with their excuses on why they ran into me or the more usual .... "sorry, i didn't see you" ... or "what else do you expect for being on the bike", it doesn't do much to help me keep my calm.

    1 place where I have never been able to keep my calm is when someone decides to teach me the rules of the road but that is for another thread.


  • Options
    #23
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Beasty wrote: »
    (there is no speed limit for cyclists)

    That's not true, they are bound by the rules of the road. It is, however, moot in the OP's case.


  • Options
    #24
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    lyders wrote: »
    I don't think it would be my gut reaction, and it hasn't been in the past, but maybe that is just me.
    The general equivalent reaction with females is to burst into tears. Don't do this, you will make poor driver who just knocked you down upset. ;)


  • Options
    #25
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    nipplenuts wrote: »
    That's not true, they are bound by the rules of the road. It is, however, moot in the OP's case.
    Completely offtopic but there is nothing in the rules of the road about speed limits applying to cyclists. The legislation introducing speed limits applies them to motorised vehicles only. In practical terms anyway there are few speed limits that a cyclist would typically be capable of breaking (the new 30km/h zones are about it.)


  • Options
    #26
    lyders
    Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭lyders


    blorg wrote: »
    The general equivalent reaction with females is to burst into tears. Don't do this, you will make poor driver who just knocked you down upset. ;)

    Ouch Blorg! Haha!! Can't say I've done that one either! I do think we get a bit more sympathy though! :)


  • Options
    #27
    redmaxi
    Registered Users Posts: 297 ✭✭redmaxi


    Diarmuid wrote: »
    but most people will take such a shot of adrenaline after a near - death experience ,that tipping their hat is not the first thing on their mind.
    Speaking of which, I got a right wallop off a car out in Douglas the other day. The first thing I done was look at the HRM to see what 'twas reading, it shot up to 153 from resting (I was at the lights).


  • Options
    #28
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    blorg wrote: »
    Completely offtopic but there is nothing in the rules of the road about speed limits applying to cyclists. The legislation introducing speed limits applies them to motorised vehicles only. In practical terms anyway there are few speed limits that a cyclist would typically be capable of breaking (the new 30km/h zones are about it.)

    While recognising the continued off-topic nature of this, I must point out for the advisement of other readers, from the rules of the road

    "The purpose of the Rules of the Road is to save lives and prevent injury on our roads. The rules apply to all road users: drivers, pedestrians, motorcyclists, horse riders and cyclists."


  • Options
    #29
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    nipplenuts wrote: »
    While recognising the continued off-topic nature of this, I must point out for the advisement of other readers, from the rules of the road

    "The purpose of the Rules of the Road is to save lives and prevent injury on our roads. The rules apply to all road users: drivers, pedestrians, motorcyclists, horse riders and cyclists."
    No, you are simply wrong on this one. The law on speed limits specifically applies to "mechanically propelled vehicles":
    Road Traffic Act 2004 wrote:
    “47.—(1) A person shall not drive a mechanically propelled vehicle at a speed exceeding the speed limit—
    (a) that applies in respect of that vehicle, or
    (b) that applies to the road on which the vehicle is being driven where that speed limit is lower than that applying to that vehicle.

    The law has always stated that speed limits apply only to mechanically propelled vehicles, which excludes bicycles.

    There are laws that apply to both motorists and cyclists, but this is not one of them.


  • Options
    #30
    DualFrontDiscs
    Registered Users Posts: 932 ✭✭✭DualFrontDiscs


    blorg wrote: »
    No, you are simply wrong on this one. The law on speed limits specifically applies to "mechanically propelled vehicles":



    The law has always stated that speed limits apply only to mechanically propelled vehicles, which excludes bicycles.
    Just out of curiousity blorg, does the law state that bicycles are not mechanically powered? Like I said, just curious, as it could be argued that bicycles are mechanically powered (cogs, chains, etc), just as it could be argued that cars are chemically powered (petrol, diesel, etc).

    DFD*

    *DissectingFuelDichotomies.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Raam
    Registered Users Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    DualFrontDiscs wrote: »
    Just out of curiousity blorg, does the law state that bicycles are not mechanically powered? Like I said, just curious, as it could be argued that bicycles are mechanically powered (cogs, chains, etc), just as it could be argued that cars are chemically powered (petrol, diesel, etc).

    DFD*

    *DissectingFuelDichotomies.

    Well, Blorg is a bit of a machine :pac:


Advertisement