Who is in the wrong? Cyclist and Car

fasttalkerchat

Ok, A cyclist pulls into the road to pass a parked vehicle parked in his lane and is clipped by a car.
Is he in the wrong?
(Obviously the car driver is acting a prick and the van maybe shouldn't be parked there.)

CiniO

IMHO driver totally at fault.
I would gladly run him over myself on my bike when he gets out of his car and becomes pedestrian.

Supergurrier

Cyclists make up the rules as they go, stay in the cyclists lane next time tbh

ahyeahok

Did the cyclist indicate that he was moving out of the cycle lane?

CiniO

Supergurrier wrote: »

Cyclists make up the rules as they go, stay in the cyclists lane next time tbh

Cyclist changed lane from cycle lane to "normal car lane" because there was obstruction on his lane.

What did you expect him to do? Keep riding on cycle lane, and then stop and wait for cars to pass unless he can continue to go?

fasttalkerchat

CiniO wrote: »

IMHO driver totally at fault.
I would gladly run him over myself on my bike when he gets out of his car and becomes pedestrian.

Why? What if he had slammed on the brakes and still hit the cyclist?

Supergurrier

CiniO wrote: »

Cyclist changed lane from cycle lane to "normal car lane" because there was obstruction on his lane.

What did you expect him to do? Keep riding on cycle lane, and then stop and wait for cars to pass unless he can continue to go?

Yes, i didn't see him hand signal in the video either

fasttalkerchat

Supergurrier wrote: »

Cyclists make up the rules as they go, stay in the cyclists lane next time tbh

He had no choice because there was a vehicle parked in his lane, the road is better than the footpath.

fasttalkerchat

ahyeahok wrote: »

Did the cyclist indicate that he was moving out of the cycle lane?

Possibly he did just before the video, can't be sure.

face1990

If it weren't for the little traffic island, I would say the driver is at fault. With the van parked up ahead the driver should have anticipated the bicycle moving out, plus there's a wide central reservation to move into.

However, the cyclist chose a very bad point to move into the road. He moves into it right at the traffic island, the one point where the car can't move over to accommodate him.
Just as the driver should anticipate the cyclist moving out of the cycle lane, the cyclist should have been more aware of the point at which he was merging into the traffic lane.

nacimroc

Cyclist completely in the wrong. Its a tight squeeze for the car to pass between the island and cycle lane without cyclist pointlessly taking up 5 feet of road.

Gaurantee cyclist would be moaning if car was in cycle lane so why the hipocrisy

Cookie_Monster

even if the cyclist was on the very left of the cycle lanes driver would still not have been the required 1.5m distant while passing. Dangerous overtaking by him IMO and clearly not paying attention as he would have noted the obstruction the cyclist was coming up on and anticipated him moving out.

CiniO

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Why? What if he had slammed on the brakes and still hit the cyclist?

Cyclist is on the driving lane from the begining of the video.
Car overtakes him 4 seconds later.
Even if cyclist had changed lane just right before the video starts, it still gives a car 4 seconds to slow down. It's a city so surely 50km/h limit applies at least.
You can stop from 50km/h to 0 in less than 2 seconds so driver had plenty of time to react even in the worst scenario.

Alanstrainor

face1990 wrote: »

If it weren't for the little traffic island, I would say the driver is at fault. With the van parked up ahead the driver should have anticipated the bicycle moving out, plus there's a wide central reservation to move into.

However, the cyclist chose a very bad point to move into the road. He moves into it right at the traffic island, the one point where the car can't move over to accommodate him.
Just as the driver should anticipate the cyclist moving out of the cycle lane, the cyclist should have been more aware of the point at which he was merging into the traffic lane.

Agree.

Neither can say they are completely without blame here.

Cyclist didn't check over his shoulder, and as far as we can tell didn't indicate(although I can honestly say that I don't stick my arm into traffic every time i move around obstacles in my path).

It didn't seem like the cyclist got a whack, but I reckon he shouldn't have tried to have a go at the motorist...on the outside...in the middle of the road. I bet he had a helmet cam moment, where he was more than happy to have a chat and point at his camera in the process.

I'm a cyclist, and have a camera btw.

CiniO

face1990 wrote: »

If it weren't for the little traffic island, I would say the driver is at fault. With the van parked up ahead the driver should have anticipated the bicycle moving out, plus there's a wide central reservation to move into.

However, the cyclist chose a very bad point to move into the road. He moves into it right at the traffic island, the one point where the car can't move over to accommodate him.
Just as the driver should anticipate the cyclist moving out of the cycle lane, the cyclist should have been more aware of the point at which he was merging into the traffic lane.

As you know while moving to other lane, you have to give way to other vehicles on that lane.
If cyclist wait for the last moment (after the traffic island) he could be stuck on cycle lane, as there could be few cars coming behind him.
That's why he chose to move earlier when driving lane was clear.

CiniO

nacimroc wrote: »

Cyclist completely in the wrong. Its a tight squeeze for the car to pass between the island and cycle lane without cyclist pointlessly taking up 5 feet of road.

Of course it's a tight squeeze. Therefore driver is not meant to overtake cyclist on the island.

Gaurantee cyclist would be moaning if car was in cycle lane so why the hipocrisy

There is a car in the cycle lane.

CiniO

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Cyclist didn't check over his shoulder, and as far as we can tell didn't indicate(although I can honestly say that I don't stick my arm into traffic every time i move around obstacles in my path).

We can't see that as from the very beginning of the video he is already on the driving lane.

Possibly he changed without indicating just right before the video starts.
But even in that case, it was 4 seconds for the car to reach him. Plenty of time for the car to slow down anyway.

Extinction

The cyclist is obviously wrong. His lane is obstructed, he needs to slow down and stop if necessary and wait for an opening in traffic before overtaking the parked van like any other road user would have to. He had plenty of time to reduce his speed when he saw his lane was blocked. Instead he decided to just cycle out in front of a faster vehicle, I too would be annoyed too if a cyclist behaved like that in front of me.

Supergurrier

Extinction wrote: »

The cyclist is obviously wrong. His lane is obstructed, he needs to slow down and stop if necessary and wait for an opening in traffic before overtaking the parked van like any other road user would have to. He had plenty of time to reduce his speed when he saw his lane was blocked. Instead he decided to just cycle out in front of a faster vehicle, I too would be annoyed too if a cyclist behaved like that in front of me.

But this is superhappycyclistland where everybody is psychic

challengemaster

Piss poor driving and road etiquette from both tbh.

CiniO wrote: »

Cyclist changed lane from cycle lane to "normal car lane" because there was obstruction on his lane.

What did you expect him to do? Keep riding on cycle lane, and then stop and wait for cars to pass unless he can continue to go?

CiniO wrote: »

Cyclist is on the driving lane from the begining of the video.

The cyclist states in his video that he's just about straddling the white line between the cycle lane and driving lane. That's also obvious from the footage.

There's faults on both sides though.

The cyclist if he was paying attention, should have spotted the crossing ahead and been fully in the cycle lane while passing it. He should also have had some idea what was behind him before moving out. And that's not to mention the bad road positioning in the first place.

Yes, he had to move out to overtake the parked car, but he's not moving THAT fast, It's not like he can't slow down or stop either, and as far as we can tell he didn't signal any intentions of moving out.

And yes, the car should have slowed down and waited til after the crossing to overtake.


As I said, piss poor from both parties.

face1990

CiniO wrote: »

As you know while moving to other lane, you have to give way to other vehicles on that lane.
If cyclist wait for the last moment (after the traffic island) he could be stuck on cycle lane, as there could be few cars coming behind him.
That's why he chose to move earlier when driving lane was clear.

Except it wasn't clear!

I cycle a fair bit myself and often have to slow down in similar situations, almost down to a standstill sometimes, to wait for a break in traffic. Being stuck in the cycles lane is no excuse to cut in front of cars.

But as I said earlier, I think both are to blame in this instance.

nacimroc

CiniO wrote: »

Of course it's a tight squeeze. Therefore driver is not meant to overtake cyclist on the island.

The driver is in the driving lane. The only problem occured when the cyclist came out of his lane. The cyclist didn't give consideration to cars trying to pass on the island so swung out way to early and caused himself bother. Why the hell didn't he wait until he was past the island nearer the van before going into the driving lane? He caused the problem, by not considering other road traffic. If I was the driver, I would have assumed he wouldn't block the road at the island miles before an obstacle.

Edit: and just to be clear, the cyclist chased the car in the middle of the bloody road if you watch again. If I was in a car behind and he was in the middle of the road ignoring the cycle lane, the silver car would have been the least of his problems.

CiniO wrote: »

There is a car in the cycle lane.

And here's a cyclist giving out about it.

face1990

Supergurrier wrote: »

But this is superhappycyclistland where everybody is psychic

All he needed to do was look over his shoulder.

Extinction

Supergurrier wrote: »

But this is superhappycyclistland where everybody is psychic

Sorry then, let me rephrase that. The driver is wrong because he should have known the cyclist would ignore the fact that his lane was obstructed.

CiniO

Extinction wrote: »

The cyclist is obviously wrong. His lane is obstructed, he needs to slow down and stop if necessary and wait for an opening in traffic before overtaking the parked van like any other road user would have to. He had plenty of time to reduce his speed when he saw his lane was blocked. Instead he decided to just cycle out in front of a faster vehicle, I too would be annoyed too if a cyclist behaved like that in front of me.

Would you also try to run him over because of your annoyance?

In fact you don't know if he changed lane in the last moment in front of faster vehicle. I doubt it.

Supergurrier

CiniO wrote: »

Would you also try to run him over because of your annoyance?

In fact you don't know if he changed lane in the last moment in front of faster vehicle. I doubt it.

Have you watched the video atall ? :pac:

Alanstrainor

CiniO wrote: »

We can't see that as from the very beginning of the video he is already on the driving lane.

Possibly he changed without indicating just right before the video starts.
But even in that case, it was 4 seconds for the car to reach him. Plenty of time for the car to slow down anyway.

Both were wrong tbh. Driver didn't anticipate cyclist, and cyclist both chose a bad road position to move out, and handled the post clip situation poorly.

CiniO

face1990 wrote: »

Except it wasn't clear!

Come on.
We can see on video, that at least for 4 seconds after cyclist changed lane, it was clear.
This gave more than enough time for driver to slow down.

I cycle a fair bit myself and often have to slow down in similar situations, almost down to a standstill sometimes, to wait for a break in traffic. Being stuck in the cycles lane is no excuse to cut in front of cars.

He didn't cut in front of any car. If he did car would have to do emergency braking or sth. Car driver just most likely didn't react at all and keep at his normal speed he was doing.

CiniO

nacimroc wrote: »

The driver is in the driving lane. The only problem occured when the cyclist came out of his lane. The cyclist didn't give consideration to cars trying to pass on the island so swung out way to early and caused himself bother. Why the hell didn't he wait until he was past the island nearer the van before going into the driving lane? He caused the problem, by not considering other road traffic. If I was the driver, I would have assumed he wouldn't block the road at the island miles before an obstacle.

Miles before the obstacle?
Cyclist reached the obstruction 3 seconds after he was overtaken by this car.
We can see on t he video a total of 7 seconds of him riding in driving lane.
Do you really think 7 seconds is too early to change lanes to avoid obstruction.
Or maybe you think that he should stop before the obstruction, and carry his bike through the pavement to pass it, just to make sure he doesn't cause any inconvenance for driver.
Come on. That's mad.

Cyclist changed lane from cycling lane to driving lane to avoid obstruction. And some mad driver was trying to kill him. That's it.
He didn't wait longer, as he seen car coming behind him, and he knew that if he won't change lane early enough he will get stock before obstruction.


[/QUOTE]

nacimroc

He was blocking the road long before the island and waaaaay before the obstacle. Its clear he has no consideration for other road users. (And this is just where he decided to edit the video from. He could have been blocking it for miles)

CiniO

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Both were wrong tbh. Driver didn't anticipate cyclist, and cyclist both chose a bad road position to move out, and handled the post clip situation poorly.

If I was the cyclist, I would probably move to the middle of driving lane, to make sure no idiot would try to overtake me on the island.
THat's the only thing he could have done better.
As while he stayed at the very left side of driving lane, he gave opportunity for this idiot to overtake him.

Tallon

As usual with these threads, they are both idiots!

They were both in the wrong... One getting as worked up as the other

Although, I hear the cyclist cursing and swearing and mouting, and not the driver.. and conveniently, he's popped some text in that gives the impression that the driver did this, that and the other!

Judging by the disabled comments, and the negative ratings on the video, I'd tend to lean towards the biker being an asshole and thinking he has done zero wrong (Even though he hit the car) (although he says he only 'tapped' it :rolleyes: )

Alanstrainor

CiniO wrote: »

If I was the cyclist, I would probably move to the middle of driving lane, to make sure no idiot would try to overtake me on the island.
THat's the only thing he could have done better.
As while he stayed at the very left side of driving lane, he gave opportunity for this idiot to overtake him.

This is what I do tbh. Every day. Move out to the driving lane completely, when there is space obviously, and indicate blah blah blah!

Extinction

CiniO wrote: »

Would you also try to run him over because of your annoyance?

In fact you don't know if he changed lane in the last moment in front of faster vehicle. I doubt it.

You obviously havent watched the video, if you did you would have noticed that the cyclist didn't reduce his speed at all even though it was obvious that there was a vehicle blocking his lane. If the cyclist had looked over his shoulder he would have seen there was a car behind and this would have been clue number 1 that he should slow down.

CiniO

nacimroc wrote: »

He was blocking the road long before the island and waaaaay before the obstacle. Its clear he has no consideration for other road users. (And this is just where he decided to edit the video from. He could have been blocking it for miles)

As I said above, he was on the road (driving lane) for 7 seconds.
How can you say that cyclist was blocking the road? He is entitled to use the road. His lane was blocked, so it's obvious he had to move to driving lane, and it's even more obvious he had to do it in advance - not in the last moment.
Is 7 seconds too much?

CiniO

Extinction wrote: »

You obviously havent watched the video, if you did you would have noticed that the cyclist didn't reduce his speed at all even though it was obvious that there was a vehicle blocking his lane. If the cyclist had looked over his shoulder he would have seen there was a car behind and this would have been clue number 1 that he should slow down.

Imagine you are driving on motorway on driving lane (most left lane).
From long distance you see it's blocked.
What do you do?
Slow down and stop, or maybe keep your speed and change lane to right one way ahead of obstruction?

nacimroc

CiniO wrote: »

As I said above, he was on the road (driving lane) for 7 seconds.

Is 7 seconds too much?

Maybe the van was just parked there for 7 seconds? That's ok then?

CiniO wrote: »

How can you say that cyclist was blocking the road?

Because he WAS clearly blocking the road!! I even put a pretty little picture for you to see.

CiniO

nacimroc wrote: »

Maybe the van was just parked there for 7 seconds? That's ok then?



Because he WAS clearly blocking the road!! I even put a pretty little picture for you to see.

He was riding on the road.
He wasn't blocking the road.
I don't need a picture, thanks.

Cookie_Monster

Extinction wrote: »

The cyclist is obviously wrong. His lane is obstructed, he needs to slow down and stop if necessary and wait for an opening in traffic before overtaking the parked van like any other road user would have to. He had plenty of time to reduce his speed when he saw his lane was blocked. Instead he decided to just cycle out in front of a faster vehicle, I too would be annoyed too if a cyclist behaved like that in front of me.

no he's not as the driver overtook him dangerously (less than 1.5m clearence) regardless of where the cyclist was he was not given enough space. Even if he was at the very left of the lane it would still have been a dangerous overtake not leaving enough gap. totally the drivers fault as he clearly was not paying attention, nor does he know*(or care about perhaps) the minimum safe overtaking distance required.

Also not sure about the UK but if it was in Ireland that's not a valid cycle lanes due to the dashes and would be considered the same lane as the roadway giving the cyclist free reign to move out as he saw fit.

Extinction

CiniO wrote: »

Imagine you are driving on motorway on driving lane (most left lane).
Suddenly you see it's blocked.
What do you do?
Slow down and stop, or maybe keep your speed and change lane to right one way ahead of obstruction?

The thing is that the cyclist could see from a long way off that his lane was blocked, there was nothing sudden about it.

CiniO

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

no he's not as the driver overtook him dangerously (less than 1.5m clearence) regardless of where the cyclist was he was not given enough space. Even if he was at the very left of the lane it would still have been a dangerous overtake not leaving enough gap. totally the drivers fault as he clearly was not paying attention, nor does he know*(or care about perhaps) the minimum safe overtaking distance required.

No such thing in Ireland as far as I know. :mad:

CiniO

Extinction wrote: »

The thing is that the cyclist could see from a long way off that his lane was blocked, there was nothing sudden about it.

Yes - that's right.
And what?

What would you expect him to do assuming he saw the obstruction from a long way?

PS - Yes I know what you mean now. I just worded my last answer badly. Corrected now. You can read it again and pleas answer. What do you do if you see obstruction from long distance?

Extinction

CiniO wrote: »

Yes - that's right.
And what?

What would you expect him to do assuming he saw the obstruction from a long way?

I would expect him to take a look over his shoulder and move out to overtake when it was safe to do so. If it wasn't safe as is obvious from the video I would expect him to slow down and stop if necessary like any road user would have to when the road ahead is blocked.

Ronnie Beck

He deosn't seem to be using the cycle lane at all. He pulled out onto the road far too early IMO and was asking for some gobsh]te to try to overtake. Looks like he's noticed the obstruction afterwards as an excuse. He miles from the van when the video starts and out of the cycle lane.

nacimroc

CiniO wrote: »

What do you do if you see obstruction from long distance?

There was 1 car behind him, so most people would stay left in their lane, let the car pass, then pull into driving lane and pass obstacle at their leisure. Normal, considerate, logical. They were inconsiderate and got treated as such.

CiniO

Extinction wrote: »

I would expect him to take a look over his shoulder and move out to overtake when it was safe to do so. If it wasn't safe as is obvious from the video I would expect him to slow down and stop if necessary like any road user would have to when the road ahead is blocked.

I generally agree with you about that except from one crucial thing - It was safe to do so - it was safe for him to change lane, as lane was empty. He couldn't anticipated that the car which was way behind him when he change lane, won't be bother to slow down to match his speed.

CiniO

nacimroc wrote: »

There was 1 car behind him, so most people would stay left in their lane, let the car pass, then pull into driving lane and pass obstacle at their leisure. Normal, considerate, logical. They were inconsiderate and got treated as such.

Do you always know how many cars is there behind you when you change lanes?
I usually notice only the first one.

challengemaster

CiniO wrote: »

He was riding on the road.
He wasn't blocking the road.
I don't need a picture, thanks.

He's perfectly entitled to cycle on the road, but he's doing it stupidly and being inconsiderate to other road users. Either take a position firmly in the cycle lane, or firmly in the centre of the road. Where he was, he WAS blocking the road for other vehicles behind him.

CiniO

Guys, this discussion explains one thing.
I try to cycle a lot (as much as harsh weather conditions in the west allow me to).
But no matter what, I drive lot more. I spend probably 50times more time behind a steering wheel than cycling.

Anyway - I can't remember over last year while driving, any cyclist which I encountered, which would behave dangerously and which would do anything that I had to react suddenly to avoid the accident.

But unfortunately while cycling, it's hard to think about any day where I wouldn't encounter some idiot car drivers trying to kill me by passing me by millimetres, or by cutting right in front of me.

This thread and your response to it, seems to explain why is that.
Most drivers (including most of you in this thread) don't give a hell about cyclists, and if they could, they would run them all over to get rid of them.
Sad but true.

Cookie_Monster

CiniO wrote: »

This thread and your response to it, seems to explain why is that.
Most drivers (including most of you in this thread) don't give a hell about cyclists, and if they could, they would run them all over to get rid of them.
Sad but true.

aye, cyclists will always be seen as a lesser form of life by most motorists despite having more right to be on the road (no test, tax, insurance etc needed).

Though every group of road users is the same, taxis hate buses hate pedestrians hate cyclists hate car drivers hate farmers hate horse riders...

Ronnie Beck

I encounter that situation every day cycling in galway. That cyclist is a moany b[itch IMO. We don't even have cycle lanes here. It's an extreme sport, you either hop the curb or squeeze around the van. The rules of the road and whos right or wrong are no use to you when your dead.