Right of way question - cyclists at junction

woodchuck

This morning I saw a bit of a bump between a taxi and a cyclist at a junction. I didn't see the whole thing, but I got the impression that the taxi was turning left and the cyclist was going straight (on the left side of the taxi).

Who actually has right of way in this situation?

I found this link (http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print), which includes:
"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"

So does that mean that the taxi actually had the right of way in the situation above and that the cyclist should have stopped? (assuming the taxi indicated!)

I just want to be clear if I ever find myself in the same situation as the taxi. Obviously if I see a cyclist bombing along in the cycle lane, I'm not going to turn left on top of them, but it would be good to know who actually has the right of way.

Alanstrainor

That sounds about right. If the taxi was indicating left then the cyclist should not have passed. But if there was no indicator, then it's a bit of a muddier situation. Either way, the process for turning is mirror, signal, mirror manoeuvre so the cyclist should have been seen.

Isambard

if they were traveling side by side, then the taxi driver is to blame. If the cyclist was undertaking and the taxi was indicating, then the cyclist is wrong. If the taxi wasn't indicating the taxi was wrong.

Lots of "ifs"

fishy_fishy

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"

Technical answer: the only time the cyclist is in the wrong is if they actually sped up to overtake the turning vehicle on the inside....

Real answer : if you're unusure that you'll get across because it's too closeto call, let them pass. Your car could be scuffed vs them being killed. Try proving they sped up so substantially after you signalled that you went from being able to get across safely to knocking them off their bike. Think of them as just another lane of traffic on your inside. You wouldn't cut across a car on a dual carriageway, forcing them to brake, just so you can take an exit, would you?

seamus

There's a question hanging over this in terms of cycle lanes.

For example, if a cyclist was riding in a bus lane and the car in the driving lane, then the above law doesn't apply. Instead the car in the driving lane must yield to all traffic in the bus lane, before crossing the lane. Because you may not cross a lane or move into a lane without yielding to all traffic already in that lane. Thus a cyclist in a bus lane is entitled to overtake a left-turning vehicle in the driving lane (even if it would be a bit crazy).

But then you have cycle lanes. There's a question over whether the same rule applies there too. Is a vehicle required to yield to all traffic in a cycle lane, before they can cross the cycle lane? Convention would probably say "yes", in which case the "left-turn" rule above doesn't apply to the cyclist. But it's very much a huge grey area.

ED E

While reading the thread I was prepping to post that until reading Seasmus' post. The lane/not a lane nature of cycle lanes, especially so called advisory ones makes a whole mess of this.

We really need a case in a precedent setting court to sort it out. Practically "advisory" lanes cannot be considered lanes as they're used in places where its impossible for a standard width car not to lane straddle.

dave1982

Take a look at Righttobikeit (@righttobikeit): https://twitter.com/righttobikeit?s=09

This fella thinks once he's in the cycle lane he has right of way of all car turning left. I watched a few of his videos. There are a few danger spots that's he's been nearly hit before but he continues not to slow down at junctions where cars turn left cross cycle lanes. Tbf he has met a few dangerous overtakes etc but common sense should come into play at junctions for both bikes and cars espically if you're aware of risks of motorist not expecting bike coming up on the left

Thoughts on this retaking his lane as he puts it

https://twitter.com/righttobikeit/status/1143519634735415296?s=19

ebbsy

dave1982 wrote: »

Take a look at Righttobikeit (@righttobikeit): https://twitter.com/righttobikeit?s=09

This fella thinks once he's in the cycle lane he has right of way of all car turning left. I watched a few of his videos. There are a few danger spots that's he's been nearly hit before but he continues not to slow down at junctions where cars turn left cross cycle lanes. Tbf he has met a few dangerous overtakes etc but common sense should come into play at junctions for both bikes and cars espically if you're aware of risks of motorist not expecting bike coming up on the left

Thoughts on this retaking his lane as he puts it

https://twitter.com/righttobikeit/status/1143519634735415296?s=19

Hopefully no one is learning from him.