legality of filtering through traffic

freddie mac

Is it legal to filter through stationary traffic?
I was pulled over by a motorbike gard this morning for doing this on O'Connel St heading south outside Clery's. He told me I was expected to stay left and remain in lane behind traffic. I had just overtaken him whilst we were both in the bus-lane and the bike lane marked was blocked by buses. I was careful to indicate and was only doing 10mph.

Thanks for any advice

Collumbo

Mistake in first reply: see below

scottreynolds

Flip him the Bird .|. cross the road and ride like the wind...

Ghost Rider

What you're "expected to do" and what you're legally required to do may be entirely different things, especially if the bike lane is blocked.

Sounds like this moto-cop was in a bit of a snot (as I find they often are). He probably just didn't like being overtaken.

(How's Fannie Mae, by the way?)

freddie mac wrote: »

Is it legal to filter through stationary traffic?
I was pulled over by a motorbike gard this morning for doing this on O'Connel St heading south outside Clery's. He told me I was expected to stay left and remain in lane behind traffic. I had just overtaken him whilst we were both in the bus-lane and the bike lane marked was blocked by buses. I was careful to indicate and was only doing 10mph.

Thanks for any advice

Collumbo

If it was illegal, then I should be in prison by now. I do this every day, without fail. I cycle to work because I can get away with doing this... otherwise I would drive a car. I also have done it infront of Gardaí bikes. I suppose if you got off and walked your bike through the cars he'd have come up with another classic excuse to have a stern chat with you...

Your Garda friend was probably just a bit bitter because you were able to get ahead.... :rolleyes:

Forget about it. Continue as you normally do. And be safe.

Lumen

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html#cycle-tracks

Personally, I tend to do whatever is most likely to keep me alive.

Eoin D

I found a lot of cycling legal mumbo jumbo on my server about cycle lanes. I'll post it up if people want but I wouldn't subject anyone to that double dutch unless they asked me to!! :P

blorg

I believe it is legal if traffic is stopped, or "moving in queues" (slowly.) Here is an article dealing with the situation in the UK for motorcyclists which is probably similar.

Eoin D

Lumen wrote: »

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html#cycle-tracks

Personally, I tend to do whatever is most likely to keep me alive.

Thats much easier on the brain that what I found

eth0_

Lumen wrote: »

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_cycling-safely.html#cycle-tracks

Personally, I tend to do whatever is most likely to keep me alive.

There's no specific law banning cyclings from weaving through traffic but you are expected to follow the rules of the road and that means not causing a danger to yourself and other road users - and don't try to tell me weaving through traffic isn't dangerous!

It drives me crazy how reckless cyclists are in this city. I cycle to work most days and its usually the serious cyclists (wearing proper cycling gear, on an expensive bike) who think they are above the law and never obey the traffic signals. As a driver they are downright dangerous.

freddie mac

thanks I will continue to cycle safely. I don't think he took too kindly to being overtaken whilst he was illegaly in the bus-lanes so he had to think of an "offence". Not worth the hassle to ask him which part of the Road Traffic Act he would quote.

Eoin D

Hmmmmmm

(3) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), a pedal cycle must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.
(b) Paragraph (a) shall not apply in the case of a cycle track on the right-hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 023 has been provided,
(i) where a person driving a pedal cycle intends to change direction and has indicated that intention, or
(ii) where a bus is stopped in the cycle track at a point where traffic sign RUS 031 (bus stop) is provided, or
(iii) where a vehicle is parked in the cycle track for the purpose of loading or unloading.

Ste.phen

I don't think that applies as there isn't a mandatory cycle track in that location

Lumen

eth0_ wrote: »

There's no specific law banning cyclings from weaving through traffic but you are expected to follow the rules of the road and that means not causing a danger to yourself and other road users - and don't try to tell me weaving through traffic isn't dangerous!

What's "weaving" got to do with anything on this thread? The discussion topic is filtering through stationary traffic.

Raam

eth0_ wrote: »

There's no specific law banning cyclings from weaving through traffic but you are expected to follow the rules of the road and that means not causing a danger to yourself and other road users - and don't try to tell me weaving through traffic isn't dangerous!

It drives me crazy how reckless cyclists are in this city. I cycle to work most days and its usually the serious cyclists (wearing proper cycling gear, on an expensive bike) who think they are above the law and never obey the traffic signals. As a driver they are downright dangerous.

I've seen some horrific behaviour from all types of cyclists. A guy I cycled with recently (not of this forum) was a very good race cyclist, but flouted every rule going. It made me ashamed to cycle with him.

freddie mac

that is my point both myself and the garda had been filtering through stationary traffic at approx.10 mph. I think the message is not to overtake fat biked garda.

Raam

Original Poster: did you get a ticket, or just a "telling off"?

freddie mac

I think he was trying to tell me off but as I couldn't work out the offence I didn't really accept his argument. What could he have charged me with given he had behaved in exactly the same manner all the way down O'Connell St?

Raam

freddie mac wrote: »

I think he was trying to tell me off but as I couldn't work out the offence I didn't really accept his argument. What could he have charged me with given he had behaved in exactly the same manner all the way down O'Connell St?

He must not have had his coffee this morning

Rob_l

I also had a garda give a very absurd warning this morning.

He told me i wasn't allowed overtake on the inside he was stopped at traffic lights and was the second vehicle, when the light went green i was level with him in the traffic and took off around the left hand turn he took exception to this. Pulled me over told me he could take me to the station for not having a hi vis vest no helmet and overtaking on the inside, because he had no windows on the side of his van and couldn't see me


I didn't want to point out thats what his wing mirror was for and there was no legal obligation for me to wear a helmet or hi vis vest.


I have lights on the bike but this was 8:30 this morning so i didn't need them.

I just nodded my head said yeah yeah yeah and left him go.

I think he was annoyed that i was faster than him on my bike

seamus

He had probably just been sitting at a set of red lights and seen about 20 cyclists breaking the lights in all sorts of creative and blatant ways.

Then you crossed his path and because you and him were both moving slowly, you were an easy catch.

Forget about it and chalk it down to him having a bad morning. We all have them, but don't have the fortune of being able to take it out on others.

rp

blorg wrote: »

I believe it is legal if traffic is stopped, or "moving in queues" (slowly.) Here is an article dealing with the situation in the UK for motorcyclists which is probably similar.

The rule of the road advises:

When cycling alongside traffic stopped in line, be aware of gaps in the
traffic to allow other vehicles to turn across the stationary lane. The view
of the car that is turning may be blocked due to the traffic build-up.

That's kind of saying its ok to filter - they;d hardly be advising on how to break the law safely.

Raam

Moral of the story: if there's a copper around, watch your actions.

Gavin

Rob_l wrote: »

I also had a garda give a very absurd warning this morning.
He told me i wasn't allowed overtake on the inside he was stopped at traffic lights and was the second vehicle, when the light went green i was level with him in the traffic and took off around the left hand turn he took exception to this.

Going up the inside of any vehicle around a left bend ain't a terribly good idea, particularly a van. You probably scared him and he was in a position to give you stick for it. Still, fairly ridiculous alright.

rubadub

rp wrote: »

The rule of the road advises:

That's kind of saying its ok to filter - they;d hardly be advising on how to break the law safely.

I recently saw a bus shelter poster warning motorists to watch for cyclists overtaking on the inside. Similarly if it was breaking the law it should really be a poster warning cyclists not to overtake on the inside, or at least point it out, e.g. say "watch out for cyclists illegaly overtaking on the inside"

blorg

@rubadub- I always thought those posters were to warn pedestrians waiting for the bus (there are frequently cycle lanes that weave in behind the bus stops and I have seen the warnings on the rotary timetable things where they would not be seen by motorists.)

eth0_

freddie mac wrote: »

I think he was trying to tell me off but as I couldn't work out the offence I didn't really accept his argument. What could he have charged me with given he had behaved in exactly the same manner all the way down O'Connell St?

"What do you mean you're charging me with reckless driving because I broke a red light and drove on the wrong side of the road? I just saw a Garda car do it!".

You don't know why the Guard did it and he's not obliged to tell you.

Raam

eth0_ wrote: »

"What do you mean you're charging me with reckless driving because I broke a red light and drove on the wrong side of the road? I just saw a Garda car do it!".

You don't know why the Guard did it and he's not obliged to tell you.

That's not what the original poster did

freddie mac

most of the replies have been helpful in explaining why the gard felt he had to have a word. The above was not. I feel that if a gard wishes to issue a warning about cycling behaviour it should have some basis in law or common sense (both would be a surprise!).

'68 Fastback

Just wait for "Opperation Freeflow" to start "easing" the Christmas traffic again, then we can all watch the garda on the corner of Darthmouth road and Leeson St. as he observes the countless bikes break the lights every morning! Overtime well earned:D

bealbocht

There are rules of the road on O'Connell st... ?? could have fooled me..

Dont use it much, but the last time I cycled up there , I could clearly see why, the "Dublin City Cycle" (thing.. what ever it was called) stopped at College green. Its a bit mental... , and now it comes with coppers giving ear-fulls, on the grounds 'you probably do break loads of lights when he's not looking'


Still there are a lot of "liberties" taken by cyclists.., it is only a matter of time before the crack down starts.

On the plus side, I replaced my lights today for a fiver (cateye compatible, lovely jubbly, in one of pound/jumble shops on Mary St (not the hardware one, next door))
Speaking of which, is it just me, or do others peoples front light only ever work for about a week..??, never have a problem with the rear.. batteries even seem to last for ever, the front go wonky really quick ???? same for about 4 sets.. ???

Morgan

bealbocht wrote: »

lights...for a fiver

bealbocht wrote: »

pound/jumble shops on Mary St

bealbocht wrote: »

.do others peoples front light only ever work for about a week..??.

I can't imagine why

Just on a similar point - on my way home today through Ranelagh there was a motorbike garda at the front of the queue going the opposite way to me. As if by magic all cyclists waited at the lights until a green came.

Powerful things these Garda Motorbikes are.

cyclopath2001

Rob_l wrote: »

Pulled me over told me he could take me to the station for not having a hi vis vest no helmet and overtaking on the inside, because he had no windows on the side of his van and couldn't see me

He was partly bluffing. There is no law requiring cyclists to wear high-vis vests or helmets. He was also bluffing about taking you to the station. If you provide your name and address and support it with ID, he can't arrest you.

If a Garda is going to do you for anything, first and foremost he has to state a valid reason for stopping you. Not wearing a high-vis or helmet don't qualify and could constitute grounds for complaint against the Garda if these were the only reasons given. (Not having a bell, lights or generally acting like a prick do qualify though.)

Passing on the inside of stopped or slow moving traffic is not explicitly prohibited. Passing on any side is prohibited if it causes inconvenience or danger to yourself or others. That's a matter of opinion and is quite arguable at 10mph in stopped traffic.

A clever Garda might stop you and ask you why you're doing what you're doing and let you fess yourself up. Normally, if they stop you with a question (such as 'why are you not using the cycle track?'), it's likely that he's not sure if you are breaking the law and how things go will depend on your response & attitude.

Stark

freddie mac wrote: »

Is it legal to filter through stationary traffic?
I was pulled over by a motorbike gard this morning for doing this on O'Connel St heading south outside Clery's. He told me I was expected to stay left and remain in lane behind traffic. I had just overtaken him whilst we were both in the bus-lane and the bike lane marked was blocked by buses. I was careful to indicate and was only doing 10mph.

Thanks for any advice

It's "overtaking on the right" imo so should be legal. I remember there was a discussion about this in regards to motorcycles before and I think the consensus was that it was legal to overtake as long as there was space to do so safely; the opposite lane didn't necessarily need to be clear.

Lumen wrote:

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-f...l#cycle-tracks

The ones on O'Connell street definitely fall under the category of "non-mandatory".

eth0_ wrote:

There's no specific law banning cyclings from weaving through traffic but you are expected to follow the rules of the road and that means not causing a danger to yourself and other road users - and don't try to tell me weaving through traffic isn't dangerous!

:rolleyes:

bealbocht

Morgan wrote: »

I can't imagine why

Thanks morgan.. but the others were all standard price. Not expensive, not cheap, same as what they are charging €20 in about 5 shops around town, always a problem with the front. Makes no sense really.

gis a week or two, and I'll let you know how these work out... , if one lasts about two weeks an the other lasts 6 months.. everything is the same, except the price.

So how much did you spend on your lights... ??

Edit: actually , dont answer that, its way off topic, I'll start a thread in "bargin hunting" or something.. might be usefull to someone

Mountain_Surfer

I was heading into college this morning and was heading down Dawson St at around 9, traffic was chaotic as per usual so was cycling between lanes because there was space to do so. All of a sudden possibly the hottest bird ever just strolls out from infront of a bus to my left and by some miracle I managed to avoid her. I wasnt going as fast as I usually would because of the traffic conditions etc etc but was still going fast enough to give her a good smack. Anyway crisis averted thankfully. Dont know how I would have reacted if I had hit her, if it had been anyone else I prob would have lost the head but with ther I guess I would have been apoligetic. Kind of strange I guess!

Vélo

Mountain_Surfer wrote: »

I was heading into college this morning and was heading down Dawson St at around 9, traffic was chaotic as per usual so was cycling between lanes because there was space to do so. All of a sudden possibly the hottest bird ever just strolls out from infront of a bus to my left and by some miracle I managed to avoid her. I wasnt going as fast as I usually would because of the traffic conditions etc etc but was still going fast enough to give her a good smack. Anyway crisis averted thankfully. Dont know how I would have reacted if I had hit her, if it had been anyone else I prob would have lost the head but with ther I guess I would have been apoligetic. Kind of strange I guess!

If you hit her you might have had to give her mouth to mouth!

rflynnr

My interest in this whole discussion was sufficiently piqued as to lead me to contact the Road Safety Authority this morning to seek clarification. The Rules of the Road are extremely ambiguous on this. In fact I had always assumed that one was obliged to stop behind other traffic (in the absence of of a bike lane) when it is stationary but the Rules of the Road site suggests otherwise. At one point (http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_other-road-users.html) it tells us that cyclists "should not" (which it carefully distinguishes from "must not") weave in and out of moving traffic. This seems to assume that weaving is permitted through stationary traffic (provided one is not doing so in a reckless manner).

They're "coming back" to me. I'll post their response when (if ) it arrives...

jimmycrackcorm

I was filtering between stationary traffic at a school this morning. On the left cars were parked and the main lane traffic was stationary. I narrowly missed hitting an opening car door as a kid got out of the car on my right. It made me wonder though who would be to blame if I had collided. Me for filtering or the car for opening the door in the middle of the road.

Vélo

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I was filtering between stationary traffic at a school this morning. On the left cars were parked and the main lane traffic was stationary. I narrowly missed hitting an opening car door as a kid got out of the car on my right. It made me wonder though who would be to blame if I had collided. Me for filtering or the car for opening the door in the middle of the road.

The way it works for car insurance is if the car door is opened as your driving past the person who opened the door would be at fault. If the car door was already open then the other person would be at fault for hitting it. I presume it works the same for cyclists. As for filtering I can't see there being a problem as you were passing a parked car.

BuyingorSelling

Similiar;

Who is at fault if while cycling on the kerb side of the road appraching a junction where you can either take a left hand turn or go straight on a car turns left without using their indicater.

Malari

BuyingorSelling wrote: »

Similiar;

Who is at fault if while cycling on the kerb side of the road appraching a junction where you can either take a left hand turn or go straight on a car turns left without using their indicater.

How could the cyclist be at fault in this situation?

Lumen

BuyingorSelling wrote: »

Who is at fault if while cycling on the kerb side of the road appraching a junction where you can either take a left hand turn or go straight on a car turns left without using their indicater.

Use of the indicator is irrelevant.

If the car drives into you, it's his fault. If you drive into the car, it's your fault.

Both parties have a responsibility to avoid this happening, since they are both in a situation which "may lead them into conflict with another road user".

seamus

BuyingorSelling wrote: »

If the car drives into you, it's his fault. If you drive into the car, it's your fault.

Simply, yeah.

Basic rule is if the car overtook you just before they turned, they're at fault. If the car left sufficient time/room between overtaking you and the collision, you're at fault.

'68 Fastback

BuyingorSelling wrote: »

Similiar;

Who is at fault if while cycling on the kerb side of the road appraching a junction where you can either take a left hand turn or go straight on a car turns left without using their indicater.

Along the same lines..Who has the right of way if a cyclist and a car are approaching a crossroads, the cyclist is slightly ahead of the car and indicates to turn right?
This happened to me yesterday. The car was behind me as i had my hand out but as soon as i moved to make the turn he started laying on the horn and screaming abuse! If I see him again his paint job is getting a custom finish.

seamus

'68 wrote:

Along the same lines..Who has the right of way if a cyclist and a car are approaching a crossroads, the cyclist is slightly ahead of the car and indicates to turn right?
This happened to me yesterday. The car was behind me as i had my hand out but as soon as i moved to make the turn he started laying on the horn and screaming abuse! If I see him again his paint job is getting a custom finish.

Indication does not confer a right of way. Even if you've indicated, you're required to ensure that it's safe to change your road position before you move.

That said, anyone who overtakes a road user who is indicating to turn right could be found at least partially at fault in court.

The existence of the cycle lane actually makes the most difference in this case: If you were in a cycle lane, you are required to ensure that the other lane is clear before you change lanes. If you weren't in a cycle lane, then he shouldn't overtake a vehicle which is indicating to turn right.

Slice

Why wasn't the guard doing anything about the vehecle blocking the cycle lane in this instance?

'68 Fastback

No cycle lane involved. The geezer stayed behind me for about 30 yards while I was indicating so I thought he was letting me go. He only passed as I was about to turn.
I wonder would he prefer the classic scratchy look of a bunch of keys or the more contemporary feel achieved with a U-lock?!

Lumen

'68 wrote:

No cycle lane involved. The geezer stayed behind me for about 30 yards while I was indicating so I thought he was letting me go. He only passed as I was about to turn.
I wonder would he prefer the classic scratchy look of a bunch of keys or the more contemporary feel achieved with a U-lock?!

I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but please don't do that. He may take out his fury on the next cyclist he comes across, which could be me.

'68 Fastback

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but please don't do that. He may take out his fury on the next cyclist he comes across, which could be me.

I'm kidding! He stopped, blocking my way and laughed out the window at me! He was so flippin arrogant about the whole situation, it was hard not to have a go.