Randomness

User avatar
GG.
Posts: 4607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:16 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by GG. »

He means that the white road markings are not in and of themselves mandatory instructions in the same way a one way sign is or a speed limit repeater (same goes for the white 20 or 30 markings on the ground - these are not enforceable in themselves without the repeater).

On that basis the cyclist does not have to turn left or risk a fine/legal penalty. Clearly what they could be seen to have done however is moved over into the artic's lane despite being alongside him. As per my point, from a criminal perspective they didn't break a mandatory rule, however, if there was a civil claim for injury, the damages would very likely be reduced by a percentage on account of his or her contributory negligence.
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9175
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Randomness

Post by Jobbo »

Two points:
- one cyclist there might be hard for the lorry driver to see. But there were loads of them, so he can’t claim he didn’t see any of them without basically admitting not to have looked.
- there’s no contributory negligence from cycling straight on at a junction and a lorry squeezing you into the pavement. The cyclists were ahead; the lorry drove forwards into the bunch.
User avatar
Simon
Posts: 4738
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by Simon »

But they weren't being squeezed into the pavement. They put themselves there.

To elaborate, whilst you claim that the markings on the floor carry no legal weight, at the end of the day their lane ended at that junction. The lorry was continuing in his lane. His lane! The cyclists were trying to squeeze between him and the curb by effectively cutting into his lane. The lorry is not responsible for that squeeze, they are!

It'd be like jumping in front of a fired bullet at the shooting range (matrix time) and then complaining someone shot you.
The artist formerly known as _Who_
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9175
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Randomness

Post by Jobbo »

Was the driver going to just drive into the cyclists ahead of him too? There was at least one bike ahead of the white line to make themselves visible to the driver. Most of the cyclists were ahead of the driver by the time he got to the other side of the junction. You can’t just drive into a vulnerable road user; that is what he did.

ETA: since when did this thread become a place to argue about cyclists nearly being run over being at fault on London’s roads? This place isn’t Twitter or PistonHeads FFS.
User avatar
GG.
Posts: 4607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:16 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by GG. »

At the end of the day that form of cycling up the inside of an HGV is putting yourself at risk and you see it all the time - whatever the driver's actions (which I would expect were belligerent that he wasn't going to give way, I agree), I wouldn't have thought it safe to assume that the lorry would see me nor that he would give way to stop me from being run over. The fact that people cycle like that is assuming the best at all times and occasionally that ends up not being the case - in the cyclists case you end up dead so why do it? Its a junction with no safe cycle box up front so don't try and squeeze up the inside of an HGV into a narrowing road - its just stupid - you're relying upon the goodwill and vigilance of those around you... not something I'd do in London traffic!
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 9735
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by Mito Man »

I think the government should have a proper graphic campaign showing cyclists the risks and educating them in general. Can't imagine many people set out in the morning with the aim of ending the day at the morgue. I witnessed a particularly horrific crash where a cyclist was screaming as he was being dragged under a lorry. This one https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... uries.html
Haven't ridden a bike in the city since.
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 8727
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by nuttinnew »

Mito; grim :(

Jobbo; Devil's Advocate or Devil's Advocaat?

Mod(s); is it possible to chop this bit into a new thread?
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11633
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by mik »

I’m not clicking a dailyfail link Mito - is the story posted on any non-shitrag sites?
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 9735
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by Mito Man »

Yes but from my brief look they’re behind paywalls or don’t actually go into much detail beside stating that a cyclist was killed and the lorry driver arrested.
Daily Mail link is actually the inquest which is more detailed. Cyclist had a bike with no front brakes so couldn’t stop in time for a red light which had a stationary lorry also stopped at it. Light goes green and lorry accelerates with cyclist along side it in blind spot. Cyclist out drags lorry and cuts in front off it but misjudges and gets clipped, goes under.
I didn’t see any of the above until just after all that and even then I couldn’t tell where the sounds were coming from.

Lorry driver was arrested but later cleared of charges.
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 3805
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by jamcg »

Image

More blind spot images, he might have been able to see the cyclists on the extreme left at the start but if I was in his shoes I’d assume they’d be turning left

Most large trucks now carry warnings not to pass them on the left, it’s common sense. Respect is a 2 way thing, cyclists can’t just ride around as if they have priority or are invincible, and when an incident happens it’s always the drivers that become the villain of the piece- the daily mail showed this video along with the headline that the lorry changed lanes, where exactly did he change?
User avatar
dinny_g
Posts: 5253
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by dinny_g »

jamcg wrote: Fri Oct 15, 2021 7:08 am Most large trucks now carry warnings not to pass them on the left, it’s common sense. Respect is a 2 way thing, cyclists can’t just ride around as if they have priority or are invincible, and when an incident happens it’s always the drivers that become the villain of the piece
This…
JLv3.0 wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:26 pm I say this rarely Dave, but listen to Dinny because he's right.
Rich B wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:57 pm but Dinny was right…
User avatar
Jimmy Choo
Posts: 2002
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:43 am

Re: Randomness

Post by Jimmy Choo »

If you're using a vehicle that makes you incredibly vulnerable, it's your responsibility to not put yourself at risk.
If you're using a vehicle that could run over said vulnerable vehicle without any noticeable effect, it's your responsibility to not squish them.

Basically, both parties fall foul of Choo's third law of motoring; Don't be a dick.
Banal Vapid Platitudes
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11633
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by mik »

nuttinnew wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:27 pm
Mod(s); is it possible to chop this bit into a new thread?
Yeah sorry - my fault.

For me - all the bikes are in the left-turn lane. Except the three (?) who have sailed past the stop line, so are arguably already in the junction. They move off swiftly ahead of the truck.

There are two lanes that go straight ahead, merging to one when you go through the junction. The cyclists choose not to queue in either of these lanes. This is also the reason why - towards the end - the truck appears to be in the middle of a massively wide lane.... why on earth was he therefore so close to the kerb? Because he was in the left of the two lanes that went straight ahead (see approx. 22secs) and he's just passed the merge point where the centerline separating those two lanes ends. He wasn't therefore pushing his truck over towards the left of his lane - he was just positioning his truck in his lane. A couple of cars come past as he stops, so they were in that second lane.

Around 1min the cyclist who was hit states that he wasn't in the left turn lane. He wasn't there. When he clearly was.

After that it degenerates into "yeah we know it was a left turn lane, all the cyclists use it to go straight ahead 'cos this is London". Their position appears to be that drivers should not expect cyclists in London to follow rules that they do elsewhere.

If you are in a left turn lane, I believe it is quite reasonable to expect that you will turn left. We all find ourselves in the wrong lane from time to time - at which point - invariably in traffic - you signal as clearly as possible and attempt to move safely into the correct lane. I do this in a car. I also do this on a bike. I don't just switch lanes and expect everyone else to accommodate me safely.

So cyclist at fault for me.

I have been 3x in Moscow. Thankfully never driving. In Moscow all road markings and signage are generally treated as "guidance". If there are 3 lanes going straight ahead, they will squeeze 4 or even 5 cars into the space. Nobody bats an eyelid. They will drop a wheel onto a kerb, drive past the stop line and turn their nose out to get to the front of the queue. They will drive the wrong way up 1-way streets, use the other side of the road on 2-way streets (sometimes doing a U-turn and then reversing up the road into the traffic to pass a queue in the direction they were going). They will drive along pavements.

My favourite is on their motorways - queue on the exit slip road you want? No problem - drive up past the queue, just beyond the exit, and then U-turn onto the hard shoulder and approach from the wrong side. Probably joining a queue of 2 or 3 others doing the same. People let them in. It is not unexpected.

Unsurprisingly - everyone ignoring all the rules causes loads of accidents. Thankfully we have moved beyond that level of pish in the UK. And that should be the case, even if you are in London.
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9175
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Randomness

Post by Jobbo »

GG. wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 9:31 pm At the end of the day that form of cycling up the inside of an HGV is putting yourself at risk and you see it all the time - whatever the driver's actions (which I would expect were belligerent that he wasn't going to give way, I agree), I wouldn't have thought it safe to assume that the lorry would see me nor that he would give way to stop me from being run over. The fact that people cycle like that is assuming the best at all times and occasionally that ends up not being the case - in the cyclists case you end up dead so why do it? Its a junction with no safe cycle box up front so don't try and squeeze up the inside of an HGV into a narrowing road - its just stupid - you're relying upon the goodwill and vigilance of those around you... not something I'd do in London traffic!
I agree with that, and I did say so in the first place. But the cyclists ahead of the lorry did nothing wrong by being ahead of the lorry. Being in a position to avoid an accident isn't the same as being contributorily negligent that it happened.

The fact that they had gone up a left turn lane is not relevant, despite what 90% of twitter seems to think. It would have been pretty obvious that the majority of cyclists weren't turning left anyway from their position in that lane, and in particular the one in front of the white line. The driver accelerates at them; it's as if he was intending to drive into one or more but didn't care which he hit.

Seems to be a pretty old video anyway and even if the driver was prosecuted it wouldn't be reported so we'll never know the outcome.

Cyclists do fucking stupid things a lot of the time, which is why, when I'm driving, I hang well back and give them plenty of space then overtake as I would any powered vehicle. Most drivers behave like fucking idiots when dealing with cyclists on the roads, and on my bike I'm well aware of that. I'm not sure that this particular video is a very useful demonstration of what people should do when driving or cycling, sadly.
User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 8727
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by nuttinnew »

mik wrote: Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:31 am

Yeah sorry - my fault.

I didn't mean it like that, I meant it's an interesting read worthy of its own thread so it doesn't get derailed by something else on here :)
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9175
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Randomness

Post by Jobbo »

User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 3805
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by jamcg »

User avatar
Gwaredd
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:57 am

Re: Randomness

Post by Gwaredd »

I can guarantee that if a car pulled that manoeuvre in front of the Police, it would be 3 points thanks very much.

I get it's not mandatory to turn left, but if you're in the wrong lane, you have to wait until its safe to merge into the correct lane or go around.

You don't force yourself up the inside of an artic because 'everyone does it '

Silly cunts.
Cheers.

Gwaredd
DaveE
Posts: 1421
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:19 pm

Re: Randomness

Post by DaveE »

Re the cyclist thing

It doesn't really matter who's right or wrong of you're dead

There are rules, and there's common sense and as others have said, cyclists and other road users both need to use them

I agree that a lot of cyclists have started to ride much too 'offensively'. Riding 'defensively' can be dangerous, but taking thingi too much in the other direction is equally dangerous
User avatar
Ascender
Posts: 3518
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:07 pm
Currently Driving: 2019 M2 Competition

Re: Randomness

Post by Ascender »

It should some common sense on the part of the cyclists and you'd hope, some sense of self preservation. But as I said earlier in the thread, whenever I'm in Edinburgh on the car or bike, I see cyclists pulling this sort of shit all the time. The other thing I see a lot-of is cyclists pulling out to overtake parked cars, buses etc without indicating or even looking over their shoulder first.

A few of the cyclists in that clip knew the risk they were taking and shot off to get ahead of the HGV driver and whether intentional or not, would have at least let him see where they were. But there's such a small gap for that to happen. And you have cyclists joining the group at the stop-light all the time, so there's no way the lorry driver knows how many are there. Nor how many aren't actually turning left.

I wouldn't put myself in that position - if I was determined to do that, I'd pull out over the stop junction in front of the lorry so he could see I was there and get right out of there as soon as the lights turned. But in actual fact, I'd be behind the lorry in queuing traffic because I'm not a dick.

Unpopular view, but some cyclists seem to thrive on confrontation with motorists. They're often the ones who refuse to wear any sort of high-vis on their bikes because its infringing on their civil rights to dress as some sort of biking ninja.
Cheers,

Mike.
Post Reply