If a cyclist comes up your left and you turn left and hit them its your fault
09 August 2017, 10:59 PM
#31
10 August 2017, 08:10 AM
#33
I was cycling up to my local village mini tesco the other day, 8AM, a number of cars passed me has we approached a queue of traffic 20 cars waiting at a train crossing. I cycled passed all these cars and waited at the front of the traffic queue. The barriers opened and I set off, (there is a cross roads only 250metres up the road from here) half way there was a parked car on my side, I began to move out to pass when the first car behind accelerated passed, only for him to brake hard and stop because of a car coming the other way. I could of got by by staying on my side of the road. Now I have to either brake very abruptly or choose to kerb hop, I chose the latter with no pedestrians around. This now placed 30 metres in front of said car, which again passed me 10 metres to go before the stop line. We both pulled in the mini Tescos. I did my shop and left before the driver even made it to the entrance. There was no need to pass on both occasions causing abrupt manoeuvres. Typical driver dislike of cyclists.
10 August 2017, 10:03 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was cycling up to my local village mini tesco the other day, 8AM, a number of cars passed me has we approached a queue of traffic 20 cars waiting at a train crossing. I cycled passed all these cars and waited at the front of the traffic queue. The barriers opened and I set off, (there is a cross roads only 250metres up the road from here) half way there was a parked car on my side, I began to move out to pass when the first car behind accelerated passed, only for him to brake hard and stop because of a car coming the other way. I could of got by by staying on my side of the road. Now I have to either brake very abruptly or choose to kerb hop, I chose the latter with no pedestrians around. This now placed 30 metres in front of said car, which again passed me 10 metres to go before the stop line. We both pulled in the mini Tescos. I did my shop and left before the driver even made it to the entrance. There was no need to pass on both occasions causing abrupt manoeuvres. Typical driver dislike of cyclists.
10 August 2017, 10:06 AM
#35
Scooby Senior
I was cycling up to my local village mini tesco the other day, 8AM, a number of cars passed me has we approached a queue of traffic 20 cars waiting at a train crossing. I cycled passed all these cars and waited at the front of the traffic queue. The barriers opened and I set off, (there is a cross roads only 250metres up the road from here) half way there was a parked car on my side, I began to move out to pass when the first car behind accelerated passed, only for him to brake hard and stop because of a car coming the other way. I could of got by by staying on my side of the road. Now I have to either brake very abruptly or choose to kerb hop, I chose the latter with no pedestrians around. This now placed 30 metres in front of said car, which again passed me 10 metres to go before the stop line. We both pulled in the mini Tescos. I did my shop and left before the driver even made it to the entrance. There was no need to pass on both occasions causing abrupt manoeuvres. Typical driver dislike of cyclists.
14 August 2017, 11:38 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
He presumably thought she bounce back up or something .
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7893446.html
Very arrogant behaviour
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7893446.html
Very arrogant behaviour
15 August 2017, 07:48 AM
#37
The rider deserves a good prison sentence riding a bike without brakes, what is it with these London 'hipsters', dumb ****s The actual circumstances of the collision remain unclear so far. Did she step out whilst on the phone without looking?
If he'd had brakes the whole apportioning of blame would of been on the victim most likely
If he'd had brakes the whole apportioning of blame would of been on the victim most likely
15 August 2017, 10:51 AM
#38
Duty of care; Cars have brakes. Even if a pedestrian stepped out in front of a Truck, Bus or car, you expect the driver to have the means to attempt a emergency stop. Bikes should be no different.
Question arises on if skates and boards should need them LOL, and don't start me on segways.
Hence why I think priority should be given in order of a vehicle's ability to stop and manouver as well as driver visibility ; HGVs at the top having priority over everything and pedestrians at the bottom have no right of way except at marked crossings. Cycles obviously being in between; above pedestrian but below cars (they'd love that).
The point being the onus to stay safe is placed on the most vulnerable road user rather than them expecting HGVs to stop on a tuppance and have 360degree vision on every blind spot.
A jaywalking law would be nice here; But that still does not allow a driver/rider to blatantly mow someone down because "they" think it's ok to have no brakes...
I had two kids on a BMX disappear under the front bumper on my scoob; blasting downhill wrong side of road across a junction I was turning into with no brakes. If I reacted a millisecond later the one lad's head would have met with my scoob's crank pulley. I was a bit pissed off about the scuffed bumper but a lot more pissed off that the bike had no brakes. And told them I'm crushing the bike if I see it on the road again without any brakes.
Question arises on if skates and boards should need them LOL, and don't start me on segways.
Hence why I think priority should be given in order of a vehicle's ability to stop and manouver as well as driver visibility ; HGVs at the top having priority over everything and pedestrians at the bottom have no right of way except at marked crossings. Cycles obviously being in between; above pedestrian but below cars (they'd love that).
The point being the onus to stay safe is placed on the most vulnerable road user rather than them expecting HGVs to stop on a tuppance and have 360degree vision on every blind spot.
A jaywalking law would be nice here; But that still does not allow a driver/rider to blatantly mow someone down because "they" think it's ok to have no brakes...
I had two kids on a BMX disappear under the front bumper on my scoob; blasting downhill wrong side of road across a junction I was turning into with no brakes. If I reacted a millisecond later the one lad's head would have met with my scoob's crank pulley. I was a bit pissed off about the scuffed bumper but a lot more pissed off that the bike had no brakes. And told them I'm crushing the bike if I see it on the road again without any brakes.
15 August 2017, 12:22 PM
#39
Duty of care; Cars have brakes. Even if a pedestrian stepped out in front of a Truck, Bus or car, you expect the driver to have the means to attempt a emergency stop. Bikes should be no different.
Question arises on if skates and boards should need them LOL, and don't start me on segways.
Hence why I think priority should be given in order of a vehicle's ability to stop and manouver as well as driver visibility ; HGVs at the top having priority over everything and pedestrians at the bottom have no right of way except at marked crossings. Cycles obviously being in between; above pedestrian but below cars (they'd love that).
The point being the onus to stay safe is placed on the most vulnerable road user rather than them expecting HGVs to stop on a tuppance and have 360degree vision on every blind spot.
A jaywalking law would be nice here; But that still does not allow a driver/rider to blatantly mow someone down because "they" think it's ok to have no brakes...
I had two kids on a BMX disappear under the front bumper on my scoob; blasting downhill wrong side of road across a junction I was turning into with no brakes. If I reacted a millisecond later the one lad's head would have met with my scoob's crank pulley. I was a bit pissed off about the scuffed bumper but a lot more pissed off that the bike had no brakes. And told them I'm crushing the bike if I see it on the road again without any brakes.
Question arises on if skates and boards should need them LOL, and don't start me on segways.
Hence why I think priority should be given in order of a vehicle's ability to stop and manouver as well as driver visibility ; HGVs at the top having priority over everything and pedestrians at the bottom have no right of way except at marked crossings. Cycles obviously being in between; above pedestrian but below cars (they'd love that).
The point being the onus to stay safe is placed on the most vulnerable road user rather than them expecting HGVs to stop on a tuppance and have 360degree vision on every blind spot.
A jaywalking law would be nice here; But that still does not allow a driver/rider to blatantly mow someone down because "they" think it's ok to have no brakes...
I had two kids on a BMX disappear under the front bumper on my scoob; blasting downhill wrong side of road across a junction I was turning into with no brakes. If I reacted a millisecond later the one lad's head would have met with my scoob's crank pulley. I was a bit pissed off about the scuffed bumper but a lot more pissed off that the bike had no brakes. And told them I'm crushing the bike if I see it on the road again without any brakes.
Au contraire re liability of accidents. All vehicles/drivers should be legally held responsible until proved otherwise.
15 August 2017, 01:58 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
The problem in this country now is that everybody is fully aware of their rights, but not so aware of their responsibilities 
I bet if accident statistics were compiled properly, rather than as a hammer to beat drivers down, they would show that pedestrians with phones are by far the biggest cause of accidents in towns.
Having said that, the muppet on the fixie comes across as a w4nker of the highest order! Like most cyclists in London, he gives the rest of us a bad name
I bet if accident statistics were compiled properly, rather than as a hammer to beat drivers down, they would show that pedestrians with phones are by far the biggest cause of accidents in towns.
Having said that, the muppet on the fixie comes across as a w4nker of the highest order! Like most cyclists in London, he gives the rest of us a bad name
23 August 2017, 09:53 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
Probably get away with suspended.
Not a great precedent
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.m...th/720146/amp/
Not a great precedent
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.m...th/720146/amp/
25 August 2017, 08:27 AM
#43
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably get away with suspended.
Not a great precedent
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.m...th/720146/amp/
Not a great precedent
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.m...th/720146/amp/
25 August 2017, 06:36 PM
#48
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting reading if it's true !
I know the DM is not the best source of independent factual info but ....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sh-tattoo.html
I know the DM is not the best source of independent factual info but ....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sh-tattoo.html
26 August 2017, 10:01 AM
#50
In certain situations, yes; bridle paths and public footpath/thoroughfares being one.
There is a current trend for gangs of moutain/trail bikers that think it's ok to whizz down these at 20+mph in large groups (sometimes more than ten) on the very same narrow paths used by walkers of all ages.
Had arbitrations on a few occasions now as I have to cross a bridle path to get onto my drive; due to the hedges it's totally blind. But it's not that which bothers me, as children, pensioners and dog walkers use the same path and a collision combined with a 5+ bike pile up will result in serious if not lethal injury.
But I can remonstrate with these people all day long and it's like talking to a brick wall; They will only learn when they hit and kill a pedestrian innocently using the same path; I'm probably on YouTube somewhere as it's been captured on a few go-pros by now
There is a current trend for gangs of moutain/trail bikers that think it's ok to whizz down these at 20+mph in large groups (sometimes more than ten) on the very same narrow paths used by walkers of all ages.
Had arbitrations on a few occasions now as I have to cross a bridle path to get onto my drive; due to the hedges it's totally blind. But it's not that which bothers me, as children, pensioners and dog walkers use the same path and a collision combined with a 5+ bike pile up will result in serious if not lethal injury.
But I can remonstrate with these people all day long and it's like talking to a brick wall; They will only learn when they hit and kill a pedestrian innocently using the same path; I'm probably on YouTube somewhere as it's been captured on a few go-pros by now
27 August 2017, 10:22 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.t...ing-bikes/amp/
Maybe couriers everywhere have been doing this forever
Maybe couriers everywhere have been doing this forever