Cam footage - who is at fault here?!

jon1981

So I was on my regular commute this morning. Coming up to a junction level with a car, myself in the cycle lane proceeding straight ahead, motorist turning left.

I've done this journey 100s of times and 99.99% of the time, car looks in mirror, slows and waits for opportunity to turn... that is... until this tool decides differently. I may be wrong but i'm pretty sure I had right of way here.

If above link is broken ->

https://youtu.be/EQZPowFh7xw

Effects

Video isn't working.

The evasion you had to take there was bonkers, at 2 or 3 points because of his actions he was 100% aware of you being where you where.

BUT you should have seen he was indicating left on the approach and sat back im afraid. You reach him just as he's about to turn.

Fixed embedding for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQZPowFh7xw

the_pen_turner

you are. you can see at 7 seconds that the car is indicating. your not allowed to overtake on the left if the car infront is turning left

also the car was wrong for the second part.

jon1981

Actually what you don't see is the queue of cars ahead of him. We reached the junction at the same time.

the_pen_turner

its hard to get the full picture with only a rear facing cam

jon1981

the_pen_turner wrote: »

its hard to get the full picture with only a rear facing cam

Yeah in this instance it matters. I'll have to invest in front facing for completeness. He slowed down to my speed due to the traffic ahead of him. I Didnt catch him up purposely.

the_pen_turner

was he indicating before you got to him

mickdw

Hard to know full story from that cam but the first glimpse we get of the bmw shows his indicator on so why put yourself in such a situation would be my question? If you know he is turning, keep yourself in a safe position. If you keep doing that type of move, a half blind driver will knock you down. He will likely be in the wrong but does it matter if you are injured or killed?

jon1981

Point Taking. Footage is not complete. Indicator came on as i got to his rear about 10 metres out so I'd call it last minute. Given the slow speeds both of us braked handy enough.

Though he was determined to get by me!

Cookie_Monster

the_pen_turner wrote: »

you are. you can see at 7 seconds that the car is indicating. your not allowed to overtake on the left if the car infront is turning left

indicating does not give you right of way to cross a lane if there is someone already in that lane. The fact the cyclist is slightly behind rather than along side is not relevant, it was not safe for the car to enter and cross the cycle lane and he should have waited until the lane was clear

ittakestwo

I presume the cam is on your bike and your not the bike in the cam?

If so the driver is 100% at fault here as he cant make the turn with out forceing you to break. This is the same as a 2 lane road, if you are on the inside lane and want to go to the out side lane you have to make sure there is enough room, even if you are 1 or 2 meters ahead of the car on the inside lane you can't barge across. If they can't take a left with out forceing you stop then they are at fault if a collision occurs.

CramCycle

As said earlier, without a front cam it is impossible to say. From my perspective, your both in the wrong from a "whats the correct thing to do", from a legal stand point, I think you are in the wrong based solely on the video.

Morally:
Driver was turning left (and as far as the objective viewer knows, indicating in good time), you should not have went up the inside. Either hold back or go around them.
Driver knew you were there and knew where you would be, should not have went, right of way or not.
When you got round, it looks like you made it in front and stopped (perspective is a bitch) but then you keep pushing. At this stage, time to let it go. the driver is still pushing, being in the right isn't what I want on my gravestone.
(I add a caveat that what I say on the internet and what I would do in real life may be completely different).

Legally:
If the driver was at the turn, indicating, and moving before you got to them, then they had the right of way as I think, and could be wrong, that cycle tracks on road are not separate lanes. You can use them to overtake on the left but do not have right of way in the above scenario.

knucklehead6

jon1981 wrote: »

Though he was determined to get by me!

Nope... from what i saw you were the one who passed him and you were the determined one.

If he had passed you then cut you off to make the turn he'd be wrong, but from my pov you were more wrong there.

And no i'm not a cyclist, but i have driven support car for cycle events in the past.

ted1

the_pen_turner wrote: »

you are. you can see at 7 seconds that the car is indicating. your not allowed to overtake on the left if the car infront is turning left

also the car was wrong for the second part.

I think your getting the op mixed up with the muppet behind him who comes off the footpath

Lumen

I think Cram is right. When using a cycle lane you are perpetually undertaking which is legal by exception unless there is a vehicle turning left. Then you have to stop undertaking.

The intent of the law appears to be to prevent conflict by putting the onus on the cyclist to manage speed relative to traffic being undertaken, but in practice it allows for cutting up with impunity.

Practically speaking you have to be prepared for vehicles turning across you from both directions at every junction you pass and every dropped kerb, regardless of who is right.

buffalo

As per Cram and Lumen, the law (SI 2012/332) says:

(b) A pedal cyclist may overtake on the left where
vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or
are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal
cycle, except where the vehicle to be overtaken—

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and
there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle
in which the driver has signalled an intention to
turn to the left will execute a movement to the
left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

The driver was indicating the entire time they were in frame. Assuming they were indicating for a couple of seconds before that, then you were not performing a legal overtake.

If they weren't indicating before you started your overtake, then you were in the legal right, but probably not wise to continue with the overtake anyway.

cython

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

indicating does not give you right of way to cross a lane if there is someone already in that lane. The fact the cyclist is slightly behind rather than along side is not relevant, it was not safe for the car to enter and cross the cycle lane and he should have waited until the lane was clear

ittakestwo wrote: »

I presume the cam is on your bike and your not the bike in the cam?

If so the driver is 100% at fault here as he cant make the turn with out forceing you to break. This is the same as a 2 lane road, if you are on the inside lane and want to go to the out side lane you have to make sure there is enough room, even if you are 1 or 2 meters ahead of the car on the inside lane you can't barge across. If they can't take a left with out forceing you stop then they are at fault if a collision occurs.

Buffalo, Lumen and CramCycle have already addressed this well, but the crux of the issue is that nowhere in the Irish statutes are cycle tracks equated to or given the same status as lanes, so it can't be assumed that there is a responsibility on drivers to yield to cyclists using them to pass on the left. If they are delineated by a solid line (mandatory lane), then obviously it's a do not enter for motorised vehicles, but where the line goes dashed as is the case here, the law affords basically no protections or particular right of way.

listermint

Legal or not please do not perform these maneuvers, there's nothing gained from being right and dead.

If you see the indicator 10 metres out then slow down and possibly go down the otherside of him.

You put your body on the reliance a driver would see you, when the chances are they could have their mind in the office or on last year's holiday.

It's not worth being right in these scenarios and too many die taking this risk. Usually with vehicles that can't or haven't seen you

Lumen

The obvious legislative solution is to make left turning when being undertaken illegal, then both parties would be in the wrong in the event of a collision.

Then, if people behaved according to the law, they would have to slow down and "negotiate" the turn, i.e. the driver would have to wait until any approaching cyclists had stopped.

Seve OB

ittakestwo wrote: »

I presume the cam is on your bike and your not the bike in the cam?

If so the driver is 100% at fault here as he cant make the turn with out forceing you to break. This is the same as a 2 lane road, if you are on the inside lane and want to go to the out side lane you have to make sure there is enough room, even if you are 1 or 2 meters ahead of the car on the inside lane you can't barge across. If they can't take a left with out forceing you stop then they are at fault if a collision occurs.

Comments like this :rolleyes:

I often wonder where some people learn the rules of the road.

Alek

that cycle tracks on road are not separate lanes.

I was always convinced they are. Does anyone know what does the law say?

Guys, I've seen a guy getting wiped out on the road. He was in the right and couldn't avoid anything but that didn't matter one bit, he was dead by the time that I got to him.

It's not f#cking worth it.

cython

Alek wrote: »

I was always convinced they are. Does anyone know what does the law say?

Almost all (if not actually all) of the legislation relating to cycle tracks is contained in SI 332/2012:

“Cycle tracks

14. (1) A cycle track shall be indicated by—

(a) traffic sign number RUS 009 (with-flow cycle track) provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM 023 (broken white line) which latter signs may be marked on the right hand edge of the cycle track or on the right hand and left hand edges of the cycle track,

(b) traffic sign number RUS 059 (contra-flow cycle track) provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) which may be marked on the right hand edge of the cycle track or on the left hand edge of the cycle track or on both sides, or

(c) traffic sign number RUS 058 (shared track for pedal cycles and pedestrians).

(2) The periods of operation of a cycle track may be indicated on an information plate which may be provided in association with traffic sign number RUS 009, RUS 059 or RUS 058.

(3) Where a cycle track, provided by traffic sign number RUS 009 in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM 023 (broken white line), is two-way, pedal cycles shall be driven as near as possible to the left hand side of each lane.

(4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided, or

(b) a cycle track is a contra-flow cycle track where traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided and pedal cycles shall only be driven in a contra-flow direction on such track.

(5)(a) A mechanically propelled vehicle, other than a mechanically propelled wheelchair, shall not be driven along or across a cycle track on the right hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 022 has been provided, save for the purposes of access to or egress from a place adjacent to the cycle track or from a roadway to such a place.

(b) A reference in paragraph (a) to driving along or across a cycle track shall include a reference to driving wholly or partly along or across a cycle track.

Additionally, the signs/markings used for cycle tracks (RRM 022 and RRM 023) are specific to them, and not the same as those used for "normal" traffic lanes, meaning the same restrictions and caveats do not necessarily apply to them as to traffic lane markings such as RRM 001 and RRM 002a/b, etc.

Cookie_Monster

cython wrote: »

Buffalo, Lumen and CramCycle have already addressed this well, but the crux of the issue is that nowhere in the Irish statutes are cycle tracks equated to or given the same status as lanes, so it can't be assumed that there is a responsibility on drivers to yield to cyclists using them to pass on the left. If they are delineated by a solid line (mandatory lane), then obviously it's a do not enter for motorised vehicles, but where the line goes dashed as is the case here, the law affords basically no protections or particular right of way.

how is it not the same as the dashed lines between two driving lanes?

650Ginge

2 tonne car indicating left. But you pushed on anyway.

The 5 driver is an ignorant bollocks too. Two of you at it but he's less likely to get hurt.

average_runner

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

how is it not the same as the dashed lines between two driving lanes?

Actually there is no dash line at the turn, the lane ended at the full white line!

comanche_cor

So I cycle this junction regularly, its a crappy junction like a lot of junctions here in this area!

Personally I would never be up the inside of any vehicle at a junction - I would normally hanging back at the rear of the car, making myself part of the traffic i.e. holding road position, until past the turning point. We all make mistakes - its just, as we all know, that when a driver makes a mistake us as cyclist come off worse.

IMO both have made mistakes here, you were most likely in the blind spot of the driver 'if' they checked their mirrors. The reaction of the driver when they did spot of you was awful, absolutely horrible. It looked like they were trying to force you off road! Most likely they were distracted and thought you were turning left.

As a driver I would let a cyclist through in this scenario as I don't trust them if they are up my inside at a junction. No clue what the rules of priority are in this scenario, but common sense should prevail!

I simply think that this could have been avoided by hanging back a few feet and waiting a few seconds.

cython

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

how is it not the same as the dashed lines between two driving lanes?

If you see my more recent post, they are different markings on the road, and thus afforded different meanings.

jon1981

comanche_cor wrote: »

So I cycle this junction regularly, its a crappy junction like a lot of junctions here in this area!

Personally I would never be up the inside of any vehicle at a junction - I would normally hanging back at the rear of the car, making myself part of the traffic i.e. holding road position, until past the turning point. We all make mistakes - its just, as we all know, that when a driver makes a mistake us as cyclist come off worse.

IMO both have made mistakes here, you were most likely in the blind spot of the driver 'if' they checked their mirrors. The reaction of the driver when they did spot of you was awful, absolutely horrible. It looked like they were trying to force you off road! Most likely they were distracted and thought you were turning left.

As a driver I would let a cyclist through in this scenario as I don't trust them if they are up my inside at a junction. No clue what the rules of priority are in this scenario, but common sense should prevail!

I simply think that this could have been avoided by hanging back a few feet and waiting a few seconds.

You know I've thought about this again. Normally I am the guy that would move to the right and let him turn. Normally I'm the guy giving way while other cyclists come up behind me and just keep going, completely voiding my ability to give way. (that's another topic for another thread)

But in this instance the front camera is key to the situation

There was a car in front that was slow to take off going straight ahead when the light turned green, hence the car slowing down beside me. When I came alongside him due to him having to slow down for the car ahead, he actually accelerated slightly to make the turn once the car moved off. He saw me.

Either way, there was equal confusion on both sides. However, he did more or less try to run me off the road twice.