Bike accident..who's in the wrong?

2wheelsbetter

Hi,

I was cycling from the east approaching the roundabout shown in the attached photo. I was cycling alongside the cars. As I neared the roundabout the car that was immediately to my right pulled in towards the curb without indication and knocked me from my bike. I was in line with the back passenger seat door when the impact occured. The incident happened near the round about but not on or at it. As far as the law would be concerned, how should the blame be apportioned?

DirkVoodoo

Is there a cycle lane there or did they overtake you and then pull in? Did they just drift towards the kerb or pull in and stop?

Need more details but it sounds like they were in the wrong. If I got knocked off my bike I would first expect them to stop also, but if they don't then I hope you got the make/model and a reg. Report it to the Gardai, if they left then it may be taken as a hit and run.

Gavin

Sounds like you were in their blindspot, but they should have checked that. 100% their fault.

Having said that, it is sometimes possible to see something like this coming, if they are very far over to the left, or if there is a car turning right ahead etc.

billy.fish

Were you undertaking?

2wheelsbetter

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Is there a cycle lane there or did they overtake you and then pull in? Did they just drift towards the kerb or pull in and stop?

There isn't a cycle lane for that part. They didn't over take me. It was more like a swift drift towards the kerb if that makes any sense. Their intention was to take the first exit off the round about so, even though they weren't at it yet, they were getting ready to do so, I guess.

Gavin wrote: »

Sounds like you were in their blindspot, but they should have checked that. 100% their fault.

Having said that, it is sometimes possible to see something like this coming, if they are very far over to the left, or if there is a car turning right ahead etc.

Initially there was easily enough room to accommodate me. It was quite sudden then that they turned towards the kerb.

billy.fish wrote: »

Were you undertaking?

I was as the traffic was very slow moving.

J.Ball

If you treat that as two cars you are liable as you should have been paying more attention to the other cars on the road. An indicator is just an indication it doesn't hold up an insurance company wont even take it into consideration. Also you hit his back passenger door not the front of the car showing he was already partly finished the turn when you hit.

Its hard to call if the person drifted into you they would be more at fault but you gotta prove that they did that also. If they where turning and you hit them on one of the back doors that way you are liable

TinyExplosions

It's unfortunate, but sounds like you may be more to blame as technically you were undertaking at the time.

The driver should have looked, and if they didn't stop then you may get a hit and run, but from a legal standpoint you shouldn't have been there.

Were you hurt, and now looking for compensation from the driver, or just curious as to the right/wrong in this case?

billy.fish

I;d be 50/50 on this one.

Your technically not supposed to undertake another vehicle, especially as you descibe it there was only one lane.

But i'm not a lawyer, or even close to one.

SAying that i do it.

2wheelsbetter

They didn't know that I was there and while I might have been in their blindspot I would have been visible through their wing mirror. They were still on a straight section of the road so they shouldn't have been turning yet. At least I wasn't expecting their turning manouvre.

billy.fish

Much like the Spanish Inquisition ehy?

TBH, if you are approaching any junction you should expect a car to turn. Even more so if you are inside their area.

And You may not have been visible in the mirror as 90% of drivers don't use them when moving left.

2wheelsbetter

TinyExplosions wrote: »

It's unfortunate, but sounds like you may be more to blame as technically you were undertaking at the time.

The driver should have looked, and if they didn't stop then you may get a hit and run, but from a legal standpoint you shouldn't have been there.

Were you hurt, and now looking for compensation from the driver, or just curious as to the right/wrong in this case?

Just curious. Wasn't hurt much. Went on to play a game of football afterwards (badly:o)

Oldlegs

2wheelsbetter wrote: »

They didn't know that I was there and while I might have been in their blindspot I would have been visible through their wing mirror.

For what it is worth, I try to be extra careful if I "find myself" in an undertaking role (use of the passive voice, as I would never undertake intentionally as it is not legal ). By extra careful, I mean that I hang back behind the car until I am sure that I can get up past the car, or at least up to the front pax door.

funkyjebus

i was under the impression that as a bicycle user you can undertake slow moving traffic once done in a safe and slow manner. in work now so cant get info, but 99% sure this is the case. the onus would be on the driver to ensure that there is nothing to their right before making any movement even if staying in his own lane.

ten speed racer

TinyExplosions wrote: »

It's unfortunate, but sounds like you may be more to blame as technically you were undertaking at the time.

The driver should have looked, and if they didn't stop then you may get a hit and run, but from a legal standpoint you shouldn't have been there.

Passing on the left is allowed in slow moving traffic.

Idleater

For the record, assuming slow moving traffic (as would be the case approaching the roundabout) the "no underdaking" does not apply.

The OP was in the correct location on the road to proceed to the roundabout for all exits bar right, but (s)he could easily state that they were going to cross safely "at" the roundabout.

The vehicle driver has an obligation under the rules of the road to ensure that they manoeuvre with due care and attention paying particular care to more vulnerable road users and pedestrians that may come alongside while they are in traffic, and they most certainly do not have the excuse of "they were in my blind-spot" as ignorance is no defence regardless of apportioning blame.

superrdave

Oldlegs wrote: »

For what it is worth, I try to be extra careful if I "find myself" in an undertaking role (use of the passive voice, as I would never undertake intentionally as it is not legal ). By extra careful, I mean that I hang back behind the car until I am sure that I can get up past the car, or at least up to the front pax door.

Undertaking is not illegal. Ask these guys.

Sorry. In any event, it isn't illegal if the traffic in the outside lane isn't moving and your lane is. However, in circumstances like the current one, where there is no inside lane, it probably is.

To the OP, I don't think you have a great case. Going up the left at a junction is pretty foolhardy behaviour.

Idleater

superrdave wrote: »

To the OP, I don't think you have a great case. Going up the left at a junction is pretty foolhardy behaviour.

I'm fairly sure there is something in here that deals with some parking or manoeuvring indiscretion perpetrated by the vehicle that pulled in on the OP.

TinyExplosions

Right, from the statute book:

Road Traffic General Bye-Laws 1964

19.—(1) A driver shall not overtake (or attempt to overtake) if to do so would endanger, or cause inconvenience to, any other person.

(2) A driver shall not overtake (or attempt to overtake) unless he can clearly see a portion of the roadway which—

(a) is free from approaching traffic, pedestrians and any obstruction, and

(b) is sufficiently long and wide to permit the overtaking to be completed without danger or inconvenience to other traffic or pedestrians.

(3) A driver shall overtake on the right and shall not move in towards the left until it is safe to do so.

(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of this bye-law, a driver may overtake on the left—

(a) where the driver of the vehicle about to be overtaken has signalled his intention to turn to the right and the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after having overtaken, to go straight ahead or to turn to the left,

(b) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after having overtaken, to turn left at a road junction and has signalled this intention,

(c) in slow-moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver's right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle.

Now, that doesn't make anything clear as it doesn't state that there has to be an actual lane of traffic, so it's clear as mud!

DirkVoodoo

From rotr.ie:

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.

To me this is saying that it is ok to pass alongside traffic that is moving slower than the cyclist (in this case, stopped) as long as you are careful. Unfortunately if someone doesn't signal their intentions this makes it tricky business. If you cycle past Mount Anville towards the goat you will know this, one lane of traffic but people try and treat it like two lanes. Passing on the inside here is very dangerous. I think maybe report it to the Gardai and see what they say.

PeakOutput

in my opinion if you had of gotten threw to me as a claims handler i would adivse that it is 50-50 liability

the obligation is on you to make sure it is safe to overtake/undertake this is why you are partially to blame

the obligation is on them to check to make sure it is safe for them to attempt any maneuveurs like turning or parking or whatever they obviously failed to do this and that is why they are partly to blame

unless you can prove that you did everything in your power to ensure it was safe to procede and that they did something more serious wrong like be on the phone or whatever then its a 50/50 case

people saying he is 100% at fault are talking out of their holes because you are not automatically entitled to be half way up his car on the right hand side.

DirkVoodoo

Right hand side?

PeakOutput

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Right hand side?

oh right left hand side i misread this part

immediately to my right pulled

the point still stands although it is slightly more ambiguous now

you can argue that you did everything you could and you could not have anticiapted that he would hit you while turning right. however it is your responsibility to anticipate these things and procede with caution when overtaking

he is perfectly entitled to do what he did when it is safe to do so but there was an accident so obviously it wasnt safe

if i was your insurance company i would tell you we will try for 100% fault on the drivers side but be prepared for a fifty fifty settlement. if i was his insurance company i would accept anything less then 50-50

PeakOutput

looking at it again actually it look slike the one lane splits into two as it approaches the roundabout? if thats the case and he was in a different lane to you he is 100% at fault or if he had to cross over any broken or solid white lines before he hit you then he is also 100% at fault

2wheelsbetter

The facts seem to have been misunderstood so perhaps I didn't explain them very well. The driver was intended to take the 1st exit. I only knew this after the collision however as we'd not yet reached the roundabout when the actual collision happened (see red mark on photo in initial post for approximate location of impact). I was between the car and the kerb so I was on it's left and was in line with the read passenger door when contact was made.

I happened 2 months ago and I've no intention of persuing it legally. However, the driver was accepting no blame for the incident at the time. They gave me a false mobile number but I had their name so I found them in the directory and rang them to let them know that I was physically fine. They still maintained 100% that they were in the right. There main seemed to be that they are a "safe" driver.

kirving

Whenever I'm cycling in traffic, I try to stay out of a car's blindspot as much as possible. That's not to say I never undertake but I try to do it as safely as I can.
It's easy to cycle up beside a car in the time between the driver looks in their blindspot and they actually make the left turn.

You see a huge amount of cyclists in traffic who don't realise that cars really can't see them.

HivemindXX

Was this actually on the roundabout? It's my understanding that there is no overtaking on either side allowed on roundabouts. Anyone know the actual rules on that?

LeoD

Sorry OP but I'm going to have to side with the motorist here. The road into the roundabout looks quite narrow so I don't think it was too wise to undertake. Not surprised that the motorist gave you false details though after seeing so many posters here immediately looking to get the guards/insurance companies involved - was no doubt scared by our compo culture (I know you weren't/aren't interested in pursuing that but the motorist didn't know that) and the possible ramifications for doing nothing wrong.

tomasrojo

Best to take the lane. If the traffic is completely stalled, place yourself between two cars near but not at the top of the queue, a bit over to the left of the cars, and try to negotiate into the space between them when the traffic begins to move.

That's what I do anyway. I wouldn't proceed to the top of the queue on the left.

petethedrummer

LeoD wrote: »

Not surprised that the motorist gave you false details though after seeing so many posters here immediately looking to get the guards/insurance companies involved

One person suggested calling the gardai. Noone suggested getting insurance companies involved.

coolbeans

I don't know who's to blame here and frankly I don't care. To prevent it happening in future though you should absolutely take command of the lane about 75m from the roundabout and only relinquish the road by pulling left once safely through. You should also work on your awareness. If the traffic is crawling then move to the right of the cars in the left lane and proceed through with care. Under no circumstances should you have found yourself to the left of traffic approaching a gyratory. I often think cyclists expect too much awareness from motorists and don't allow for blind spots, not to mention stupidity and the like. This driver does sound a bit dopey though. I suppose it was the two of ye in it.

IM0

that 2nd photo someone posted of the junction makes it much easier to understand why this happened.

It looks like a very narrow approach immediately before the roundabout, in these cases as someone else said , no actually move out to the middle of the lane ALWAYS for your own safety, they cant claim not to have seen you there and they cant overtake you unless they are looking for an accident to happen.

Stand tall and growl..if you know what I mean , and going up the inside on a junction just like this is going to end in tears one day.

cdaly_

2wheelsbetter wrote: »

I happened 2 months ago and I've no intention of persuing it legally. However, the driver was accepting no blame for the incident at the time. They gave me a false mobile number but I had their name so I found them in the directory and rang them to let them know that I was physically fine. They still maintained 100% that they were in the right. There main seemed to be that they are a "safe" driver.

Based on the above, I would report the incident to the Gardai and make a complaint about being given false details. I would also identify their insurer and report the incident to them including details of the Garda report on the false info. Whatever about your not pursuing them for damage/injury, they should not get away with providing false details at the scene of an accident...

All that said, when approaching a roundabout, I take the lane until I'm out the other side If the traffic is slow I'll overtake on the right as far as safely possible before taking the lane.